>I'm not arguing for /etc/rc.local, since I don't think system
>configuration should generally be done in shell scripts.  I'm arguing
>against the ideas that:
>
>	* It's acceptable to design a subsystem such that you need a
>	  script to start it up and shut it down.
>
>	  (I will admit that there is no obvious, standard way to shut
>	  down subsystems as things stand.  "A script in /etc" doesn't
>	  strike me as the best standard to introduce, since "a way to
>	  shutdown subsystems" has nothing to do with "configuration
>	  files".)

Greg, this is something I honestly don't understand; what's the deal with
shell scripts being second-class executables?

I believe you said a subsystem should be startable/stoppable via one program,
right?  What's wrong with this program being a shell script?  When you get
right down to it, they're both executables of a sort.  Admittedly, shell
scripts require /bin/sh, but if /bin/sh doesn't work, then there isn't much
else that will.

--Ken