Subject: Re: /etc/rc.conf vs. modular subsystem control scripts
To: NetBSD Userlevel Technical Discussion List <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: John Nemeth <email@example.com>
Date: 03/19/1999 05:26:10
On Mar 19, 2:40am, Greg A. Woods wrote:
} [ On Thursday, March 18, 1999 at 23:05:04 (-0800), John Nemeth wrote: ]
} > diff and patch work wonders here. As I've said I've had to
} > change the files in /etc/init.d many times. This means that at
} > upgrade time I lose.
} RCS, or diff&patch, or some other version control tool, can work wonders
} anywhere scripts and line-oriented configuration files are concerned,
} and that includes the scripts like those in /etc/init.d.
Granted, but it's still very annoying to have to deal with a
large number of files.
} > Not to mention the upgrade restoring symbolic
} > links in /etc/rc?.d that I've renamed/deleted.
} You're not supposed to use symlinks in /etc/rc?.d -- just hard links to
} the actual scripts in ../init.d (which are possible to track in both
} directions, unlike symlinks).
I've seen vendors use both, but that's beside the point.
Consider this hypothetical scenario: I have a SysV system that I
don't want to act as an NFS server so I rename/delete the appropriate
link, and then the upgrade program comes along and re-installs the
link. That would be bad. With NetBSD, I explicitly say that I don't
want the machine to be an NFS server instead of the program having to
make a guess. It would be very easy for the upgrade program to read
/etc/rc.conf, figure this out, and do the right thing.
} Hopefully someone doesn't pipe up and suggest a M$-style .INI format for
} the control table! ;-)
I heartily agree with you on this! :-) Of course, much worse
would be an M$-style registry, which is basically just a binary
version of .INI files. Oops, that's already been done (AIX).
} > } Result: if you upgrade, you have to re-do all the local configuration
} > } in /etc/rc.conf from scratch.
} > I'm not sure this is true, but even if it is, so what? It's a
} > lot easier to deal with one file, then it is to deal with 20+.
} Not necessarily. It depends on what tools you use and how many hacks
} you had to make and in this case how many hacks you were able to
} generalize into a form that you could feed to the OS maintainers so that
} they were already present in the new version.
I still think it's easier to deal with one file, then 20+.
}-- End of excerpt from Greg A. Woods