portupgrade and daemons.

[Josef Karthauser]

On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 01:52:06PM +0200, Kay Lehmann wrote:
> 
> As far as I know this isn't the job of portupgrade. Normally it should 
> be handeled by the port itself, which could stop daemons with 
> appropriate set (de)install targets.
> I think a lot of the ports do this quite properly. Moving this to Mk 
> looks quite complicated and I think it would be the best to leave it in 
> the ports, since they should know what is required to do.
> 

Ah ok.  That makes sense. Do you know of a port that does this properly
off the top of your head?

Joe
-- 
Josef Karthauser (joe at tao.org.uk)	       http://www.josef-k.net/
FreeBSD (cvs meister, admin and hacker)     http://www.uk.FreeBSD.org/
Physics Particle Theory (student)   http://www.pact.cpes.sussex.ac.uk/
================ An eclectic mix of fact and theory. =================
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20040523/5bd939d5/attachment.bin