"J. Lewis Muir" <jlmuir%imca-cat.org@localhost> writes: >> Typically, we provide rc.d files for a package with the package >> itself, so that when users install the package, they show up (in the >> examples directory) or in /etc/rc.d (with PKG_RCD_SCRIPTS). So, I >> wonder why a separate package. > > Right. I considered that too when creating this package. I made it a > separate package because that's what had been done in net/djbdns-run and > mail/qmail-run, so I thought that was the preferred approach. What is preferred vs. what was done before for reasons which may or may not be valid is pretty complicated. > Maybe the idea is that with the DJB software, the DJB way is to create > users and groups by hand, configure it using the provided configure > program and set everything up by hand and run it under supervise, etc. > By making a separate -run package, the original package remains clean > for people wanting to do that, and the -run package provides a way to > run the package without having to do all that stuff by hand. But that's > just a guess.... Perhaps. The pkgsrc norm is that all the users, rc scripts, how to build, etc. is all part of the package. People who want to do things by hand can do things by hand, so I don't think pkgsrc has to really cater to that. If supervise is also in pkgsrc, and the rc.d stuff doesn't stop you from using it (and is merely annoying extra), that seems totally fine. > This package provides the rc.d scripts, but it also causes one group > (pubfile) and three users (pubftp, pubhttp, and publog) to be created > for running the publicfile services. Lots of other packages have that as part of the base package. > I'm open to whatever approach is considered the best. Let's give others a chance to chime in. >> This has a MESSAGE. Not specifically about this (and I realize you >> are trying to follow existing practice), but I am feeling that MESSAGE >> is more and more overused. It's fine for a package to install a >> README in share/doc/package/README or some such, and that's where >> people should go to understand how to use it. Especially with package >> managers, MESSAGE files are both overly verbose and easy to miss. I >> wonder if any of the uses of MESSAGE in pkgsrc are really appropriate; >> perhaps MESSAGE should go away, or mostly go away. > > You're right, I was just following what net/djbdns-run and > mail/qmail-run did. I certainly see your point and tend to agree with > what you're saying. I'm happy to do whatever is considered the best. I'm not sure how widely my opinion on MESSAGE is shared.
Description: PGP signature