Guenther Grau writes:
> IMHO, the new system should also be compatible to System V init
> mechanism.
>
> I think it has been mentioned before but your scheme is missing the
> ability to have real run levels. I know this could be implemented
> using your scheme, but you do not seem to provide this. Is this
> something that is left as an excercise to the user or do you plan
> implementing this?

`exercise for the user'...


> The init.d scripts you provide (they are still in rc.d in your
> tar-file :-) have a proposed structure. Is there anything that
> forces me (or any software vendor, for that matter) to follow this
> scheme? Let's say I want to have the least differences between my
> Solaris edition and my NetBSD edition. Can I just drop in/use the
> "normal" Solaris scripts, i.e. without setting any variables/using the
> /etc/rc.subr commands? I think the sysV Sxx/Kxx version will still
> work, but will the creation of /etc/rc still work?

this is a tricky issue. for the `autogeneration' to work the script
has to support argument `dumpstart' and `dumpstop', which output
a series of commands which do what `start' and `stop' do
(respectively).

i'm in the process of slightly reworking the invocation of scripts
from the /etc/rc*sh scripts (i.e, those that do rcorder) so that
certain scripts (e.g, fsck, bootconf) can pass information `back up
the call chain'.


> The only thing left for discussion is now, what will be the default
> settings used when NetBSD is shipped :-) What are your plans on this?

/etc/rc being a single file (which happens to have been machine
generated at some time). /etc/init.d/ exists for people who want to
run stuff manually. /usr/share/samples/rc{,shutdown,sysv}.sh being
alternates to /etc/rc.