Hi, Doug, On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 05:49:22PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > > Typical problem for porter (like me) is not knowing deeps of rc.d > > subsystem. To be more specific, personally me can't make 'apache13' port > > do its limits without damaging main rc shell in the same time. If you can, > > please look 'apache13' port and feel free to fix rc script there. > > I'm sorry if I wasn't clear before, the only thing port authors need to do > for properly functioning rc.d-style scripts is to install them as foo > instead of foo.sh. I have attached an untested patch for apache13 that > should do the trick, or at least show you what I have in mind. > > At some point down the road, when we've dropped support for releases prior > to 6.1, this will simply be the way that all such scripts are installed, but > between now and then, there will be some transition pain involved. When I first read your mail on arch_at_ I didn't think about it, but now I'm reading this thread, it stirs my mind. RELENG_6 is supposed to be very stable. Though the ultimate stability would be to stay in RELENG_6_0, I think MFC'ing those changes to RELENG_6 would cause much pain to system administrators who will be upgrading from 6.0 to 6.1 if they don't not update their apache13 port accordingly. I mean this would require a bold flashing note in UPDATING. However this still implies the 350 dragging ports to be updated in time for 6.1. IMHO this update might be degrade the excellent image of the FreeBSD Release Engineering. -- Jeremie Le Hen < jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >Received on Fri Dec 16 2005 - 08:50:06 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:49 UTC