Subject: Re: take 2; which way should we go for /etc/rc...
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: John Nemeth <email@example.com>
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.
} 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
} 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