>while i _really_ don't care, there are those who do -- and
>who don't want their world to change.  what i've suggested
>allows both worlds to exist.

What you suggested is that we support both init.d and rc.local.  I do
NOT see a compelling reason that we must do this, when /etc/rc.local
could be run from an init.d script.

>what that means, though, is that you can have _exactly_
>what you want, and, so can i.

I also do not believe that /etc/rc.local can safely be modified by
programs.

What I was, once again, proposing is that those who remove /etc/init.d
simply cannot use the canned installation of packages.  The package
installation tools SHOULD be able to install the binaries, etc.
Everything but the startup and shutdown scripts.  Those will fail, and
require manual intervention _JUST LIKE THEY DO NOW_ with
/etc/rc.local.

If you want that, fine.  You can have it, but I see it as a waste of
time to support automatic installation in the /etc/rc.local world when
those who want to keep /etc/rc.local around are the ones who want to
edit /etc/rc.local manually anyway.

--Michael

--
Michael Graff <explorer@flame.org>        NetBSD is the way to go!
PGP key on a key-server near you!         Netshade the world!
Cthulhu for president:  Tired of voting for the *LESSER* of two evils?