Subject: Re: have rc.d (was: CVS commit: wip)
To: Jeremy C. Reed <email@example.com>
From: Mike M. Volokhov <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/11/2003 20:59:07
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 10:24:25 -0700 (PDT)
"Jeremy C. Reed" <email@example.com> wrote:
> (Maybe I should follow up on tech-pkg instead?)
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Mike M. Volokhov wrote:
> > How to use:
> > 1) just define all RCD_SCRIPTS as usual
> > 2) .include "../../wip/oshavercd.mk"
> Thanks for adding this.
> But I think that if RCD_SCRIPTS are used as usual, then
> mk/bsd.pkg.install.mk can be made smart enough to do this itself.
Yes, IMHO it should be a part of bsd.pkg.install.mk and defs.<opsys>.mk
files, but i can't add this directly to it. Moreover, as separate file
it may (and should) be pretty tested before committing it to pkgsrc.
Next, as I've mentioned at tech-pkg, include dependent packages within
*_FOR_PLATFORM variables assume high claims to that variables. The oshavercd.mk
doesn't cancel this claims. Please see also to my patch on bsd.pkg.mk provided
in tech-pkg message within subject "Re: Dependent, but not available packages"
> Or would there ever be a situation when this oshavercd.mk is not used
> when RCD_SCRIPTS is used?
I think no. But it is possible use oshavercd.mk without bsd.pkg.install.mk
In such case it provides two additional functions: MAJOR_OS_VERSION and
OS_HAVE_RCD. However, this is just legacy, not a planned advantage.
> (On a side note, oshavercd.mk seems unclear as a filename; maybe rcd.mk or
> rc.subr.mk would be more clear -- following examples of all ready existing
> similar .mk files.)
Please feel free to rename it as you wish (as well as edit it itself).
This is pkgsrc-wip: Work-In-Progress :)