> in the case where, say, a user wants the `bsd' method.  he
   > then realises he _can_ use packages, by using the `sysV'
   > method, implimented in rc or rc.local, where ever you happen
   > to want it (perhaps at the start or end of rc.local).
   
   I don't see why the equivalent of rc.local could not be put in the init.d 
   directory.

because this "changes my world", where i may not want this.

while i _really_ don't care, there are those who do -- and
who don't want their world to change.  what i've suggested
allows both worlds to exist.

i _could_ put an rc.local in my init.d directory.  but i
don't want that.  i want to put an init.d run at some point
in my /etc/rc or /etc/rc.local -- something that _i_ can
choose -- to do, or, not to do, and can also choose what
goes where while running.  all in /etc/rc{,.local}.  some
in /etc/rc{,.local} and then /etc/init.d.  everything in
/etc/init.d.  someone needs to decide on a 'default', but,
this isn't an issue in providing support.  indeed, we could
allow netbsd to support /etc/init.d right away, without
having to make the decision to use /etc/init.d by default.

call it debug time.  :)

what that means, though, is that you can have _exactly_
what you want, and, so can i.