Subject: Re: have rc.d (was: CVS commit: wip)
To: Jeremy C. Reed <>
From: Mike M. Volokhov <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 09/11/2003 20:59:07
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 10:24:25 -0700 (PDT)
"Jeremy C. Reed" <> 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/"
> Thanks for adding this.
> But I think that if RCD_SCRIPTS are used as usual, then
> mk/ can be made smart enough to do this itself.

Yes, IMHO it should be a part of 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
doesn't cancel this claims. Please see also to my patch on provided
in tech-pkg message within subject "Re: Dependent, but not available packages"

> Or would there ever be a situation when this is not used
> when RCD_SCRIPTS is used?

I think no. But it is possible use without
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, seems unclear as a filename; maybe or
> 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 :)

BR, Mishka.