On Dec 24, 2011, at 6:15 AM, Chris Rees wrote: > On 24 December 2011 12:30, Maxim Ignatenko <[email protected]> wrote: >> The following reply was made to PR conf/163508; it has been noted by GNATS. >> >> From: Maxim Ignatenko <[email protected]> >> To: Doug Barton <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: conf/163508: [rc.subr] [patch] Add "enable" and >> "disable" commands to rc.subr >> Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 14:20:19 +0200 >> >> On 24 December 2011 04:15, Doug Barton <[email protected]> wrote: >> > This idea has been considered before and rejected because it's too >> > difficult to catch all the corner cases, and actually editing a config >> > file is not really all that hard of a thing to do. >> > >> >> The idea was to make enabling/disabling services less error-prone. It >> don't need to catch _all_ corner cases, because if administrator do >> something unusual with startup configuration he should be able to >> manipulate it in proper way, or even have tools that do something >> similar. >> Proposed patch handles /etc/rc.conf, /etc/rc.conf.local and >> /etc/rc.conf.d/* properly (I hope), so it should fit nicely in 95% of >> cases. >> Doing `service someserive enable` is much faster and less error-prone >> that `service someservice rcvar ; echo someservicercvar_enable=YES >> >> /etc/rc.conf` > > Disagree, sorry. > > If we're going to implement these ideas we should do it properly, not > for 95% of cases.
A lot depends on what those 5% of the cases are. Absent an implementation to throw stones at, such criticism is premature. If the 5% of cases are when someone has done something complicated to the rc.conf file, then I don't care: they won't use this interface and we can detect this case and do nothing. If the 5% of the cases are when someone has enabled ntpd, then that would be a non-starter. Warner_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-rc To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
