[ On Tuesday, March 7, 2000 at 15:15:11 (+1100), Simon Burge wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: rc.conf (was Re: wireless / dhcp) 
>
> der Mouse wrote:
> > 
> > (1) Why rc.local.conf instead of rc.conf.local?  It's localized
> >     additions to rc.conf, not a config file for rc.local.
> 
> I believe the reasoning was so that configurable files would end in
> ``.conf''.

Somehow I think that's exactly what der Mouse said!  ;-)

(The .local suffix applies equally well to config files as to scripts.)

Personally I still have to wonder aloud about the sanity of this idea of
grafting warts on top of bumps that cover holes....  rc.conf should be
just the local stuff that's different from the default, which should be
built into the rc script itself.  Even hiding far away where it won't
get edited accidentally, just as FreeBSD tried in vain to do, isn't much
help.

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <gwoods@acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>