Subject: Re: take 2; which way should we go for /etc/rc...
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Allen Briggs <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/08/1999 08:36:18
> } 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.
Do you have things that you specifically don't like about the SysV way,
or is it a nebulous, undefined dislike? If this discussion is going to
get anywhere at all, we need to understand the issues--why don't you
like it? What, specifically, do you like about the traditional way?
That it's traditional is a valid statement, but I don't think that
magically outweighs any other argument. [For example, I rather like
indoor plumbing and it wasn't traditional when it came around... and
it has its warts--like causing MAJOR damage when it fails. ;-]
Personally, I don't like runlevels (and I don't believe they are seriously
being considered here). I don't like having the configuration information
spread around so much (which isn't a problem if we use rc.conf with the
startup scripts). I don't like spawning a bunch of "extra" shells during
startup on my old, slow hardware (bfd--I only reboot often when I'm
working on kernel stuff and I can easily customize the startup on dev.