Subject: Re: Handling 3rd party rc scripts
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Shannon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/07/2002 14:44:07
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:27:55PM -0600, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Shannon wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 10:38:46AM -0500, Amitai Schlair wrote:
> > >
> > > I'd like to see pkgsrc eventually support installing multiple instances
> > > of a package. However, it doesn't yet, and it's going to be hard anyway,
> > > plus we don't know exactly how it'll work. So I think we shouldn't worry
> > > about it too much right now.
> > The problem is that people are doing this already. It's not uncommon to
> > have two copies of something like Apache, one normal package and one in
> > /usr/local, perhaps even several.
> > I think it would be very wrong to store /usr/pkg and /usr/local
> > configuration files in /etc. Maybe if you put them in subdirectories
> > like /etc/local and /etc/pkg, but definitely not in /etc itself.
> "/etc/rc.d/" scripts are not configuration files.
Call them support files or whatever you wish, my point still stands.
> They're supposed to be used out-of-the-box, like other support files
> in "share", or "/usr/lib/<package>". If you don't copy the "active"
> file to "/etc/rc.d", how do you decide which script to run?
If you have packages in / and /usr/local, it's reasonable to assume you
want to start both, so run both. If that's not what you want then it
seems to me you should remove the extra package or disable it.
Perhaps /usr/local/etc should have it's own config file to determine
what programs to start on bootup.
"And in billows of might swell the Saxons before her,-- Unite, oh
unite! Or the billows burst o'er her!" -- Downfall of the Gael