Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu> writes:
>Look, either address all the arguments we made in the previous round
>of discussion (/etc/init.d is 

I think the problem is that some folk don't think these arguments
are valid.  

> difficult to understand,

What's so difficult to understand?

> ... uses
>alphabetical ordering of symlink names in a manner resembling BASIC
>GOTO statements to store configuration information

What on earth is wrong with using _simple_ alphabetical
ordering for the _simple_ task of ordering startup procedures?  

Why must we invent an 18 wheeler when a wheel barrow is enough and
readily available?  Many industries are going broke these days because
they design themselves to death.  Software is no different. That last
10% of elegance,performance whatever can tripple the cost of the
development, and free s/w does have a cost - the time and effort of
the contributors.

It has also been demonstrated that the exact same process can be used
to advantage for all sorts of tasks (/etc/daily,/etc/weekly...)

> ... and does this all
>to simplify exactly one operation, when there are plenty of other,
>better ways to do that), or don't ressurect the argument at all.

Really?, which of the rather complicated suggestions thrown up last
time has ever been implemented and demonstrated to offer any advantage
at all?  And which of them would be useful for anything except booting?

Enough, sorry to drag this out...

--sjg