Re: NetBSD rc.d system -> OpenBSD. Any thoughts?

[Tony Lambiris <methodic@libpcap.net>]

Thats what open source is all out.. if you dont like the current
implementation, then create one yourself (DIY).

On 08.09.01, Marina Brown <marina@surferz.net> wrote:
> Hi All:
> 
>    At the risk of jumping into a conversation i might
> not fully understand, might i make a suggestion. The folks
> that like the rc.d system could write up a set up scripts
> that would conform to their desires and put it out as an
> optional package. I have used both systems and have no problem
> in editing whatever rc file that starts a Sys V or rc.conf
> style system. I think it is not a discussion worth spending
> a lot of time on. Perhaps the folks that preferr the Sys V type
> should write an alternative init script. Coding is better than
> arguing.
> 
>            Marina Brown
> 
> ----------------
> 
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Chris Palmer wrote:
> 
> > Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:58:05 -0700
> > From: Chris Palmer <cecibean@bitstream.net>
> > To: misc@openbsd.org
> > Subject: Re: NetBSD rc.d system -> OpenBSD. Any thoughts?
> > 
> > On 08 Aug  Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > 
> > > > However, while you're here, would you mind sharing your thoughts as
> > > > to why we should or shouldn't consider implementing this system?
> > > 
> > > Because those who want it don't understand the power of simplicity.
> > 
> > Well, there are two kinds of simplicity in conflict here. Simplicity in
> > the number of files (rc.conf wins) and simplicity in programmatic
> > control (rc.conf loses). A simple shell script can `rm
> > /etc/rc.d/somescriptlink' or `ln -s somescript
> > /etc/rc.d/somescriptlink', but it takes something a bit more exciting
> > (Perl, or awk/sed) to go through rc.conf and change things up.
> > 
> > Unless there's some handy API to programming rc.conf that I'm missing?
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Chris
> > 
> >    Give me UNIX or give me death