* carlopmart <carlopm...@gmail.com> [2012-06-10 16:47]: > On 06/10/2012 04:34 PM, Jan Stary wrote: > >Every version of the rc.conf manpage between 2.7 and 4.0 > >advises you to leave it alone and use rc.conf.local instead > >http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=rc.conf&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=OpenBSD+2.7&arch=i386&format=html > Where says here "Should not be edited."??? Says: "As an alternative, > it is also possible to leave the /etc/rc.conf file un-touched, and > instead create and edit a new /etc/rc.conf.local file. Variables set > in this file will override variables previously set in > /etc/rc.conf." ... Nothing about problems between upgrades ...
this hs indeed been made crystal clear later and was a little ambiguous back then. > and I repeat "In those days (versions 2.x and 3.x until 4.0 version) > you can modify rc.conf for soft base and use rc.conf.local for local > processes,and faq recomends to do this in this way ..." I am almost certain the FAQ never recommended anything remotely like that. rc.local was the standard way to start non-base daemons until rc.d. you seem to mix rc.local and rc.conf.local up. > >>Yes, maybe I need to update my knowledge about OpenBSD, but I think > >>it is normal for a person who had previously used, that the > >>configuration of rc.conf went in the same manner (without having to > >>read the man page). Or not? > > > >No, it is not normal to assume that things are the same as six years ago. > >(But in this case they are: use rc.conf.local instead.) > Correct, but I didn't expect this type of change in rc.conf ... can you get over it now please instead of spamming the list with your attempts to find someone but yourself to blame for your screwup? shit happens, learn from it, done. -- Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org BS Web Services, http://bsws.de, Full-Service ISP Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services. Dedicated Servers, Root to Fully Managed Henning Brauer Consulting, http://henningbrauer.com/
