Subject: Re: The new rc.d stuff...
To: Brett Lymn <>
From: Greywolf <>
List: current-users
Date: 04/07/2000 23:51:20
On Sat, 8 Apr 2000, Brett Lymn wrote:

# According to Greywolf:
# >
# >It's nicer to have the CONFIG (hello!  CONFIG!  Not script) information
# >all in one place.
# >
# Yeah, ok mea culpa - the subject line got me going and I was on a
# roll ;-)

The split rc battle is already lost (or won, depending on which side
you're on - I call it a draw).

The rc.conf battle is worth fighting for me.  Did my suggestions toward
it make sense?  i.e.

	pick whether rc.conf wins or the individual confs win, printing a
	warning	if they disagree...

	pick whether an individual conf may override a MISSING rc.conf entry
	or not, printing a warning if something is in rc.d but not

	warnings could be turned on or off...

But I'm repeating myself.

That just seems like a win to me.  I'd want rc.conf to be the definitive
authority for stuff that exists but would like to be able to run a third-
party thing just by dropping it in, even if it bitched, i.e.

Starting local daemons: sshd* xdm@
*WARNING: sshd.conf flags disagree with sshd_flags in rc.conf
@WARNING: xdm is present in rc.d but no xdm variable exists in rc.conf

But I'm repeating myself.

BSD: The World's Most Portable Operating System