Subject: Re: The new rc.d stuff... [now rc.conf]
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <>
From: S.P.Zeidler <>
List: current-users
Date: 05/11/2000 20:52:55
Thus wrote Greg A. Woods (

> In fact from a true system *maintenance* point of view, many files
> separated by type/functionality/etc., but still kept in the same
> directory, are *easier* to manage!  That's why folks like myself have
> been advocating it, and indeed hopefully at least in part why the
> changes to this effect in NetBSD have been made.

If you have to locate the source of and fix a problem on a "foreign"
machine, i.e. one not usually administered by you, where will you have
less trouble finding out what that machine actually boots with and with
what options it gets started, rc.d or rc.conf? I'm happier with rc.conf;
rc.d is nice if you have a boatload of similar machines -and a
knowledgeable admin-, but not at all when you're playing fireman on a
system that has seen too many admins with too little clue, leaving a messy
heap that's a miracle to be doing anything useful (let alone vital to a

kind regards,
-- (S.P.Zeidler)