RE: RFC: Alternate patch to have true new-style rc.d scripts inports (without touching localpkg)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org 
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org] On Behalf Of 
> Oliver Eikemeier
> 
> I don't think so. The patch is completely backwards compatible, which 
> means everything will run as it did before. Why should anyone be 
> confused by that?

However, everybody who's used to disabling scripts by changing the name such
that it doesn't end in .sh is going to be badly bitten by this.  Suddenly all
those "disabled" startup scripts will run.

> As stated above: everything users did before will continue to work. 

Except of course, disabling scripts by renaming them :)

> Besides, the patch finally unifies /etc/rc.d and 
> /usr/local/etc/rc.d in 
> the most important aspect: participating in rcorder(8). A new-style 
> script will do the same, no matter whether put in /etc/rc.d or 
> /usr/local/etc/rc.d.

Which is one thing I would like to see.

> > Additionally,
> > if ports rc.d scripts are going to participate in the boot 
> rcorder(8)ing
> > then they need to behave like the base system rc.d script.
> 
> Jup, that is the purpose of this patch.

Why not simply (yeah, I know, it'll be far from simple to implement) treat any
.sh scripts that have the FreeBSD keyword as being new style, and others as
being old style?

Just my .02<insert currency symbol> worth :)

-- 
 Rob | Oh my God! They killed init! You bastards!