Subject: Re: rc local [patches]
To: NetBSD User-Level Technical Discussion List <>
From: Thierry Laronde <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 03/19/2007 10:17:20
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 07:30:12PM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > It would be cleaner to have also a /etc/rc.d.pksrc.
> No, _really_, it would not.
> K.I.S.S.  Please.  One directory for all start/stop scripts!

No, the keep it simple principle is precisely add two supplementary
directories because:
	1) This does not add any overhead;

	2) This eases upgrades: /etc/rc.d/ is reserved for NetBSD (in the
	other mail you mention that you have _changed_ base and etc.tgz so
	to get rid of postinstall(8) running in /etc/rc.d/. If things are
	great as they are now why did you do that?

	3) This eases administration because with one glance I can
	immediately see what are additions;

	4) This eases usage because this will enforce documenting variables
	setting for added daemons, especially for pkgsrc users to  have all
	the documentation in one file, =E0 la /etc/defaults/rc.conf, namely
	a /etc/rc.defaults.pkgsrc

Keep it simple is keep it the simplest so to have everything in hand
(french meaning of maintenance). If less directories are simpler, why do
we still have a Unix file system hierarchy, and why not put everything
flat simply under / ;)
Thierry Laronde (Alceste) <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
Key fingerprint =3D 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (NetBSD)