Subject: Re: rc.d
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Frank van der Linden <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/15/2000 00:59:54
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 12:42:10AM +0100, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> I gave a sysadmin course last semester. explaining the BSD scheme then was
> easy, SysV needed more words. Now looking at /etc/rc.subr, it seems there
> are even more words necessary to make people use our new system as
> intended. I don't think this helps here.
What you are doing here is just looking at rc.subr, and saying "oh,
that looks complicated". But, scripts don't have to use it!
They will work without it. You could just drop in a script from
Solaris (except for different pathnames to applications it might
call, of course). Luke just created /etc/rc.subr to factor
out some common actions.
So, you don't have to use it, and if you want to, I suggest that you
wait for Luke to document the interface. It's not like, for example,
you judge an OSs programming interface by looking at the kernel source
code and saying that it looks too complicated.
Just try dropping in a script without using rc.subr. It should work.