Oh. Damn.
Someone *added* freebsd-current to this thread without removing
freebsd-stable. Several people have requested that we stop
discussing this on freebsd-stable, and I *thought* I was only
sending my recent messages to the one mailing list.
I do not particularly care which mailing list t
At 6:36 PM +0100 2/1/02, Erik Trulsson wrote:
>Consider that the actual code in the various rc* start scripts is
>in most cases of the form:
>
>if foo_enable==yes
> do stuff
>else
> do nothing
Let me approach this from a different angle. Several people have
tried to argue this by proposing v
At 6:36 PM +0100 2/1/02, Erik Trulsson wrote:
>Consider that the actual code in the various rc* start scripts is
>in most cases of the form:
>
>if foo_enable==yes
> do stuff
>else
> do nothing
The RC scripts are starting up in a "known" environment (loosely
speaking). Enough is known about t
[Replies pointed to -current, where this is relevant.]
Paul Fardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> types:
> When the rc.conf file includes
> foo_enable="NO"
> it's right to expect that the system will operate like a system that does
> not
> have foo installed.
So you think that if I install a syslog f
On Wednesday, January 30, 2002, at 11:40 PM, Mark Woodson wrote:
> I don't feel that the current system needs changing. It's my thought
> that if you go to the extra trouble of compiling ipfw or ipf into the
> kernel, then you want it and you get it. No matter what you've set in rc.
> conf.
> If you build a kernel without INET, the following switches don't
> result in any daemons being started if you set them to YES:
>
> syslog_enable
> sendmail_enable
> lpd_enable
I think you are confused. These will all start regardless of whether
INET is enabled.
> These are all things that
