Subject: Re: take 2; which way should we go for /etc/rc...
To: None <>
From: John Nemeth <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 12/08/1999 03:22:21
On Dec 2, 10:01am, Jason Thorpe wrote:
} On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:54:12 -0500 (EST) 
}  der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> wrote:
}  > >> f)	Full SYSV style run levels.
}  > > IMHO, this is the best solution.
}  > 
}  > And IMO, it's one of the worst.
}  > 
}  > We're BSD, dammit.  If you want to go start NetSysV and do this, I'll
}  > fully support your project.
} Unfortunately, I don't think "We're BSD, dammit" is a compelling argument.

     I do.

} BSD didn't do everything Right, and /etc/rc is a good example of that, I
} think.  It has some good points, but it isn't perfect.

     Even with its warts, I like it a heck of a lot more then the SysV way.
Of course, it is even better with rc.conf.

} Now, the SYSV way, while better in many respects, isn't perfect either.

     There's an understatement.

} However, it *IS* a fairly standardized way of doing things (SVR4 uses it,
} as does Linux), and I think adopting a standardized way is going to be

     Every SysV derivative I've seen (including various Linux
distributions) do it a different way.  There is only minimal
similarity.  How can you say that "it *IS* a farily standardized way of
doing things"?

} more beneficial to us in the long run than designing a Perfect scheme.

     I really don't think adopting that piece of crap would be

}-- End of excerpt from Jason Thorpe