Subject: Re: Possible design of the new rc.d rc.conf stuff.
To: Paul Goyette <paul@whooppee.com>
From: Greywolf <greywolf@starwolf.com>
List: current-users
Date: 04/19/2000 23:44:14
On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Paul Goyette wrote:
# Yup, read_conf_dir_first would be an acceptable name. Certainly much
# better than my idea of monolithic_conf_preferred !!! :)
Whatever it is to be called really doesn't matter -- it is the concept
which carries the weight. Certainly something which is more clearly
understood is preferred...
#
# On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Todd Whitesel wrote:
#
# > > # So, either change the name of the variable (maybe to something like
# > > # monolithic_conf_preferred) or change the sense of YES and NO.
# >
# > I submit that the use of "preferred" is the problem here.
# >
# > How about "read_conf_dir_first" or something similar?
# >
# > Either that or include a comment explaining that "preferred" means run last.
# >
# > Todd Whitesel
# > toddpw @ best.com
# >
#
# -----------------------------------------------------------------------
# | Paul Goyette | PGP DSS Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: |
# | Network Engineer| BCD7 5301 9513 58A6 0DBC | paul@whooppee.com |
# | & kernel hacker | 91EB ADB1 A280 3B79 9221 | pgoyette@juniper.net |
# -----------------------------------------------------------------------
#
#
--*greywolf;
--
BSD: u_long uptime;