Is there any reason to keep sysutils/rc_subr?
jilles at stack.nl
Sat Nov 14 13:49:45 UTC 2009
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:49:02AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> I'm wondering if there is any reason to keep sysutils/rc_subr around?
> In bsd.port.mk the default sub for %%RC_SUBR%% is already
> /etc/rc.subr, and all supported platforms have always had that file.
> After the release of 8.0 I'd like to do the following:
> 1. Deprecate sysutils/rc_subr
> 2. Update all ports rc.d scripts that currently use %%RC_SUBR%% to use
> /etc/rc.subr instead.
> 3. Simplify any ports Makefiles that depend on sysutils/rc_subr
> 4. Simplify bsd.port.mk
> I also think it would be reasonable to update the Handbook section on
> ports rc.d scripts to use /etc/rc.subr now.
> Any objections?
A separate rc_subr port may be useful in case new functions are added to
rc.subr, and it is desired to use these functions on systems that do not
have them in /etc/rc.subr.
More information about the freebsd-ports