Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 03:25:08PM +0100, Andreas Klemm wrote: > > >>All openldapXX-server ports do this for example >> >>root_at_titan[ttyp2]{219} /var/db/pkg grep /etc/rc.d */+CONTEN* >>[...] >>openldap-server-2.1.23/+CONTENTS:_at_unexec /etc/rc.d/slapd stop 2>&1 >/dev/null || true >>openldap-server-2.1.23/+CONTENTS:_at_unexec /etc/rc.d/slurpd stop 2>&1 >/dev/null || true >>openldap-server-2.1.23/+CONTENTS:_at_cwd /etc/rc.d > > That should be fixed before the release. I can't think of any reason > why these should be using /etc/rc.d instead of /usr/local/etc/rc.d. Sorry that I missed that thread, our ISP has f*cked up our connection. The reason I did this was to support services like mail and nss_ldap. I really like to be prefix safe, PR conf/56736 relates to this: <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/56736> I agree that there should be a better solution, and already asked Mike Makonnen <mtm_at_identd.net> about it, but nobody seemed to care. IMHO not participating in rcorder(8) makes the packing list pettier and avoids an ugly hack, which is good, but restrains functionality. I like the idea of account managed in an centralized LDAP directory very much. So, do you still think the scripts should not participate in rcorder(8)? It's easy to change the ports, but this is probably not the right fix. -OliverReceived on Sat Nov 29 2003 - 17:29:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:31 UTC