Subject: Re: pkgsrc rc.d scripts
To: Frederick Bruckman <>
From: Luke Mewburn <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 05/16/2001 12:19:36
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 06:47:24PM -0500, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, David Brownlee wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2001, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> >
> > > I don't see why installing two files is a problem.
> >
> > 	Having two scripts can allow them to get out of sync, and give
> > 	different behaviour between netbsd versions. I'd prefer to see
> > 	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.
> > 	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.

What's the maintenance overhead of providing two scripts: one for
pre 1.5 (which doesn't take advantage of all the rc.subr stuff, and
only supports "stop" and "start", and starts if the script is
installed, because that's how we did things back then), and one for
1.5 and later, which utilizes run_rc_command() et al ?