Subject: Re: /etc/default ickiness...
To: Mason Loring Bliss <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greywolf <email@example.com>
Date: 09/18/2000 15:30:29
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Mason Loring Bliss wrote:
# Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 16:51:53 -0400
# From: Mason Loring Bliss <firstname.lastname@example.org>
# To: Luke Mewburn <email@example.com>
# Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
# Subject: Re: /etc/default ickiness...
# On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 05:34:25PM +1100, Luke Mewburn wrote:
# > * /etc/rc.subr provides load_rc_config(), which:
# > read /etc/rc.conf
# > if /etc/rc.conf.d/foo exists
# > read it in too
# > fi
# Hm. If we're doing this, would it make any sense to have /etc/rc.conf
# not ". /etc/default/rc.conf", and have rc.subr do this instead? This
# removes the logic from /etc/rc.conf, for whatever that's worth.
Not necessarily; do all the scripts in /etc/rc.d read /etc/rc.conf?
I think it's more sensible to have /etc/rc.conf do this step because it
then becomes immediately apparent to anyone going into /etc/rc.conf
to edit it as to what's going on. If they don't see that particular
step taken, they may be mystified as to where the hell their variable
settings are coming from!
BSD: It keeps on going...and going...and going...