Subject: Re: take 2; which way should we go for /etc/rc...
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Todd Vierling <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/03/1999 20:30:57
On Sat, 4 Dec 1999, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
: Turn this table around, i.e.
: runlevel1: singleuser runlevel2
: runlevel2: runlevel3
: runlevel3: multiuser
: mount_local: runlevel1
: networking: runlevel2
: mount_nfs: runlevel2
: inetd: runlevel3
: httpd: runlevel3
: sshd: runlevel3
: indicating which service to run when switching to a certain runlevel, and
: you have a SysV inittab.
There's a reason I proposed it the other way round. The inittab-like format
assumes that you're using runlevels to organize the system. I assume
nothing about what the admin wants to use for organization except the
BSD-classic existence of "singleuser" and "multiuser". A runlevel could be
defined in terms of one of these and additional components, i.e.
would define a list of dependencies that would execute in SYSV style.
In fact, you could even add things such as "run_rc3_d", as a stub script
which iterates through /etc/rc3.d in SYSV's own style.
Rather than defining "execution timing", the config file would be
dependency-driven, integrating well with REQUIRES lines embedded in the
-- Todd Vierling (email@example.com)