/etc/rc.d location

[Kostik Belousov]

On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 10:55:52PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com>
> Subject: /etc/rc.d location
> Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:53:56 +0300
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > according to the hier(7), /etc directory contain system configuration
> > files and scripts. I had an experience with old systems where /etc
> > contained binaries for the system management, most of them now supply
> > only symlinks in the /etc. AFAIR, HP-UX from 10.x moved the startup
> > scripts from /etc into /sbin. I like this approach.
> > 
> > For us, moving /etc/rc, /etc/rc.d, /etc/rc.subr and similar files from
> > /etc to /sbin (?) have the following benefits:
> > 1. Standard update procedures, both installworld and any binary upgrade
> >    may treat the startup scripts as the usual system component. Now we
> >    rely on the mergemaster, that have to provide special support for
> >    /etc/rc.d at least.
> > 2. I believe we consider user modifications to the rc.subr and /etc/rc.d
> >    in the same way as the modifications for the sources of the buildable
> >    binaries. Putting it away from /etc mean that /etc is fully controlled
> >    by the user instead of the user/system mix.
> > 3. System provisioning (I am sorry for possibly marketroid term, but
> >    it is how it called there) becomes simpler, since we would have clean
> >    separation of the invariant part and locally changed part on the
> >    level of directories.
> > Compatibility, at the first look, may be handled by the symlinks, as
> > usual.
> 
> This is a very interesting thought.  I'm not sure that /sbin is the
> right place to put them.  They aren't needed for normal system
> operations and may interfere with user's operations.
My main point is to allow /etc/rc* to be brought up to date by the usual
update procedures without risk of hosing /etc. Whatever is found more
suitable then /sbin is ok for me.

> 
> My knee jerk reaction is 'no'.  But my more reasoned one might be
> 'that's not a horrible idea.'  I'm sure there's lots of implciations
> that I've not thought of, however.
Me too. That was the reason why I said that me is obviously wrong person
to do the change.

> 
> > Now, having the VCS that makes moving files around not so prohibitely
> > costly, I think the topic may be discussed. Obviously, I am not the
> > person who actually understand the rc, and my proposal is only proposal
> > to bring it to consideration in the case this appears to not be a
> > nonsense for some rc@ master.
> 
> Just because we can copy files, doesn't mean we must. :-)
Again, fully agree. But, unability to move was an absolute blocker for
this issue in my opinion.

-------------- 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-rc/attachments/20080605/94d8a936/attachment.pgp