Subject: Re: The new rc.d stuff...
To: Brett Lymn <>
From: John Nemeth <>
List: current-users
Date: 04/23/2000 12:52:45
On Jul 23,  7:29am, Brett Lymn wrote:
} According to John Nemeth:
} >
} >     Yep, and this is one of my biggest peeve with SysV style machines.
} >Spreading configuration info all over the place makes them much harder
} >to maintain, and therefore makes them less robust.
} If they are then they are Not Doing It Right (tm).  All the

     "Doing it Right (tm)" is defined by individual vendors, and yes I
do it right.

} conf files should reside in /etc/init.d and the rcn.d contents should

     This is the first beef.  Which rc.d directory should a link be
placed.  Note that to make things worse, some vendors run K* scripts
for the level they are going from, and some run them for the level they
are going to.  What should the number be?

} be hard links to the /etc/init.d files - hard links are traditional
} because SYSV did not have symbolic links until R4.  So, /etc/init.d
} should hold your conf files, what is the beef? ;-)

     Add to the above /etc/default and another config directory
(rc.config.d, sysconfig, etc.) which varies from vendor to vendor.
Basically, configuration information is spread out amongst a number of
directories and many many files.  I also find that on most systems the
files in /etc/init.d are either not at the right granularity or don't
have enough/any configuration options, so I often end up having to
modify "system" files with the consequent hassle of maintaining the
changes when upgrading the OS.  In conclusion, SysV machines are a
royal pain in the neck to maintain, and require a lot more work then
BSD systems.

}-- End of excerpt from Brett Lymn