Subject: Re: pkgsrc rc.d scripts
To: Frederick Bruckman <email@example.com>
From: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/15/2001 17:22:21
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
# > something similar to Greg's posting where the necessary
# > functions are embedded in the rc script.
# Yes, it is nice. I'm hesitating to declare that the "standard", only
# because I'd like to write more rc.d scripts, but I can't test them on
# 1.3.2, as Greg did. Maybe I'm being overly cautious.
I don't think the functions should be embedded in each script, certainly;
only those which are truly germane to a script should be there. Right now,
we are able to avoid the overhead in /etc/rc.d because the invoking shell
sources the subr file and then sources each of the rc.d files (with a
flag set to indicate that subr is to be essentially skipped. The speed-
up inherent in this is noticeable, even on a fast box and certainly on
If we're to develop rc.d scripts, fine, but please follow the existing
model and put in the flag (thanks, lukem!) so that the overhead is
# > Maybe even have a pkgsrc/mk/rc.subr which can be appended to
# > rc scripts on install?
# To each script? Someone voiced an idea to package up rcorder, rc.subr,
# rc.d and friends. I think it's a neat idea, but it doesn't solve the
# problem completely, because I'm sure some people will insist on doing
# things the old way. If we leave the old script untouched, however,
# they'll have nothing to complain about.
*BSD: penguin flesh never tasted so good.