On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 02:58:30AM -0800, John Nemeth wrote:
> } f)	Full SYSV style run levels.
> } 	Pros:
> } 		- don't know
> } 	Cons:
> } 		- does it really win us anything.
> } 		- This is BSD.
> 
>      Yep.  If NetBSD starts down this path, then I (and probably
> others) will be looking at switching OS'es.  One of the big reasons
> that I use NetBSD is precisely because it is BSD.  rc.conf is a nice
> improvement over the standard rc since it makes it easy to turn things
> on and off and configuration is centralised (one of the things I really
> hate about SysV is how configuration information is spread all over the
> place).  Going to that really ugly SysV method would be a major step
> backwards.  For those that want SysV, they know where to find it.

I have a problem with this kind of reasoning. I am rather disappointed
by the people who still have the religious SysV vs. BSD standpoint. If
you don't like runlevels, ok, but please specify the reasons why you
think it's ugly. Don't use the "it's not BSD" argument, if you can call
it an argument at all.

NetBSD is is called that way because it's obviously rooted in BSD. However,
NetBSD is not about "being BSD" (whatever that would mean). NetBSD is
about trying to come up with the best solution. If there is a better
solution, then we should adopt it, and I don't care whether it came
from SysV or even Microsoft. If you want pure BSD, go get yourself
a VAX and run 4.3.

I don't have a particular strong opinion about runlevels, it's just the
way of reasoning that I object to. It makes discussions about this kind
of thing almost impossible.

- Frank