"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>
> "Christopher W. Curtis" wrote:
> >
> > Let me qualify myself as saying I'm a Debian user, and that I prefer a
[...]
> > start being a leader. RedHat puts rc.d in /etc/init.d, which I don't
> > think is right, either. /etc/rc.d is fine without an extra subdir in
> > there.
>
> The other way around. I actually think RedHat has that one just right.
> I have found it much easier to browse the init files that way.
Well, I had the princible right anyway: RedHat has /etc/rc.d/rc?.d;
Debian has /etc/rc?.d, I knew Debian's path to the boot scripts was
shorter. What confused me was the symlink I made - I thought I
symlinked /etc/rc.d into /etc/init.d/rc.d in RedHat, when I actually
linked /etc as /etc/rc.d under Debian (commercial software [VMWare]
expecting an /etc/rc.d hierarchy). I still prefer the Debian way -
though I might not dislike /etc/rc.d/[0123456S] as much as rc.d/rcx.d
/etc/init.d is the same for both dists. Now, if there could be a nice
uniform way to setup such things as interface IP addresses, we'd be all
set ...
Christopher
--
Oh My God! They Killed init! You Bastards!!
make install; not war
