Subject: Re: pkgsrc rc.d scripts
To: Johnny C. Lam <>
From: Frederick Bruckman <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 05/14/2001 16:05:36
On Mon, 14 May 2001, Johnny C. Lam wrote:

> Frederick Bruckman <> writes:
> >
> > On Mon, 14 May 2001, Johnny C. Lam wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > 	My question is basically whether I should be changing the
> > > script (and other scripts in pkgsrc) to look like the
> > > script, or the other way around.
> >
> > For my answer, take a look at www/wwwoffle. I added a new rc.d style
> > script, left the old one alone, and added a MESSAGE file explaining
> > which one to use, and what to do with them.
> In the case of wwwoffle, the two scripts can be merged in the same
> simple way that is written.  Then we wouldn't need two files
> to be installed.

I don't see why installing two files is a problem. We presently
support NetBSD-1.3.x, NetBSD-1.4.x and NetBSD-1.5*. Each script is
optimal for the system it's meant to be used on. With a monolothic
script, if you make any change for NetBSD-1.5, you're liable to break
it for NetBSD-1.4.x and earlier.

> So my question still stands...which way do we prefer: standalone rc.d
> scripts or ones that use /etc/rc.subr?

You have my answer. My goal was to create a handy script that I could
copy into /etc/rc.d/. I don't see any point in shoehorning rc.d-style
scripts into older systems (and non-NetBSD systems), especially when
you already have a script to support those systems.