You are not logged in.

#1 2004-09-14 14:17:18

robot5x
Member
Registered: 2004-01-26
Posts: 266

rc.d or init.d

My brother just sent me this rather vitriolic email

magicbadger wrote:

theres no reason to use just rc.d
nowadays - for gods sake, thats how Solaris is configured. urrrrrg.
your distro stinks of smelly poo and so do you.

you can make a stab at how progress is going by what other innovations
people are using. If you want to live in the past you get left behind,
but there you go.

Aside from his rather unfortunate choice of words, I'd like to actually know what the advantages are of using bsd-style initscripts. Any thoughts?

Offline

#2 2004-09-14 15:16:59

i3839
Member
Registered: 2004-02-04
Posts: 1,185

Re: rc.d or init.d

They're simpler, cleaner, IMHO better. Try a sysv init system and you'll know.

Offline

#3 2004-09-14 15:21:43

Mr Green
Forum Fellow
From: U.K.
Registered: 2003-12-21
Posts: 5,756

Re: rc.d or init.d

What distro does your brother use ?


Mr Green

Offline

#4 2004-09-14 15:38:01

Mr Green
Forum Fellow
From: U.K.
Registered: 2003-12-21
Posts: 5,756

Re: rc.d or init.d

Load up Arch you will never go back  tongue


Mr Green

Offline

#5 2004-09-14 16:17:36

afu
Member
From: Tuscalooser, Alabummer
Registered: 2004-02-19
Posts: 155

Re: rc.d or init.d

The scripts in Arch don't really matter to the user/administrator. You make changes in one easy place, the rc.conf file, and should never have to touch the scripts.

Offline

#6 2004-09-14 16:40:56

dp
Member
From: Zürich, Switzerland
Registered: 2003-05-27
Posts: 3,366
Website

Re: rc.d or init.d

i3839 wrote:

They're simpler, cleaner, IMHO better. Try a sysv init system and you'll know.

exactly

actually, i don't see rc.d a disadvantage in arch, but also not an advantage - simply i don't really care

... but if i would have the chance to choose, i would take init.d ;-)


The impossible missions are the only ones which succeed.

Offline

#7 2004-09-15 04:50:12

kpiche
Forum Fellow
From: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Registered: 2004-03-30
Posts: 246
Website

Re: rc.d or init.d

magicbadger wrote:

dont get me wrong, I liked arch when my brother showed it to me, but I was discouraged that it didnt work on my 586

It's not as simple as a i686 install but it's doable.  I just installed Arch on two 586's this week.  I updated the original i586 root floppy to use kernel24 and to include it's own copy of packages.txt and pacman.pkg.tar.gz.  Of course as soon as Xentac updates the repo packages.txt will be incorrect and need to be redone  smile

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB