Subject: Re: rc.conf question
To: Michael K. Sanders <msanders@aros.net>
From: Andrew Brown <codewarrior@daemon.org>
List: current-users
Date: 05/05/1997 16:48:37
>I'm curious how the following syntax came about:
>
> if [ "$option" != NO ]; then
> ...
>
>Might it not be more clear if it were:
>
> if [ "$option" = YES]; then
> ...
>
>This would also have the advantage that an option would default
>to not starting up if for some reason rc.conf did not set it
>explicitly. Comments?
as silly as it might look to you (and the two halves of my brain are
continually warring over this), it actually does make sense. look
at it this way:
NO means NO. anything else means yes (including the empty string) and is
usually arguments to the program.
ex:
sendmail_flags=NO # means don't run sendmail
sendmail_flags="-bd -q1m" # means run sendmail with these args
named_flags=NO # means don't run named
named_flags="" # means run named (with no args)
others (rwhod for example) don't get any args and so are simply NO/YES
programs (meaning if it's not NO, just run it).
--
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
andrew@echonyc.com (TheMan) * "ah! i see you have the internet
codewarrior@daemon.org that goes *ping*!"
warfare@graffiti.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."