Subject: usr.sbin/route6d, or sbin/route6d
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <email@example.com>
Date: 01/10/2000 23:10:03
Question: routed is in sbin/routed. I've put route6d is in
usr.sbin/route6d. do you think this is a problem?
(it was pointed out by <firstname.lastname@example.org>, and now
When I did kame-into-netbsd-current merge, my logic was like this:
- for non-router, we have stateless autoconfiguration so we do not
really use "route6d -q" on non-router. therefore, we do not need
route6d in /sbin. even if /usr is mounted via nfs, we will have
no problem. (assuming nfs-over-v6 is working)
(oops, I still need to move sysctl into /sbin...)
- for routers, mmm, we'll have /usr in disk anyway
- putting too many things into /sbin would be bad
The question really goes down to:
- do we frequently mount /usr over nfs, via nfs server in separate
subnet? is it true for routers? if it is true, we may need to
move route6d to /sbin.
- I think we really need to move sysctl into /sbin. are you guys
happy with it?