Actually, if such a scheme can be done without the filenaming, I'd
like to take a look at it.  *THAT* is something that makes sense.
seebs@plethora.net sez:
/*
 * In message <19990317111644.A15999@thebrain.conmicro.cx>, Jay Maynard writes:
 * >For example, I'm thinking of actually implementing a control-file-based
 * >multiple rc script system, similar in concept to the SysV rc.d but without
 * >the file name conventions that folks here find bletcherous. I'm not oging to
 * >even think about doing it if it'll just get me more of the kind of NIH
 * >flamage I've seen over the past few days.
 * >
 * >Should I bother?
 * 
 * Well, *I'd* love to see it, but I don't know how far that would get you.
 * 
 * Isn't there a list that something like that should be discussed on?
 * 
 * -s
 */





				--*greywolf;
--
thought:  I ain't so damb dumn! | Your brand new kernel just dump core on you
war: Invalid argument           | And fsck can't find inode 2
                                | Don't worry -- be happy...