Also a good thing to point out is that portupgrade can be configured to
automatically start or stop a port's daemon via it's /usr/local/etc/rc.d script,
which still relies on having the appropriate line in /etc/rc.conf to tell the
rc.d script to run, but it is helpful for upgrading ports which have daemons so
they can be shut down and then started again after the upgrade is complete.
Naram Qashat
Chuck Robey wrote:
I was wondering why ports apparently aren't allowed an obvious freedom,
that of being able to set themselves to run as daemons. A greate long
time past, I seem to remember that there used to be a file
/usr/local/etc/rc.local, which (if it existed) would be automatically
sourced in at the end of rc.conf. Ports which built daemons were
allowed (well, actually, expected) to ask the user if they wished to
activate the port, and if so, the port would add a line of the form
'portname_enable="YES"', and this would make your new port operate.
Well, it seems from what I see of my new system, that this is no longer
the case. I could understand (and approve of) ports not being allowed
to modify any /etc/contents, but howcome ports can't use this rather
obvious workaround?
I'm pretty sure this used to be allowed... and it seems like a good
policy to me, from the number of non-technical folks who now run
FreeBSD. I just wanted to know why its not anymore.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
