[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#132542: sysvinit: please make /etc/init.d/rcS a conffile



I don't understand the point of this email -- are you advocating for some 
change, or to avoid some change? 

 (I looked at the bug report and skimmed some of the messages -- it seems like 
by posting this to the debian-user list you are looking for comments or 
support here, but the issue is not clear (to me).)


On Saturday, February 02, 2019 05:31:57 AM Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote:
> Thorsten Glaser:
>  > Just accept that this idea, originating from the systemd people at
> 
> Fedora/Freedesktop, is NOT welcome to classical Unix people.
> 
> Ahem!  We classical Unix people experienced this idea in the late 1980s,
> from where it *really* originated, Sun and AT&T.
> 
> * https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.sun/K9286yRtZ8c/Abwzdo05gMMJ
> 
> The separate /sbin that you are asserting to be classical Unix and
> suggesting as the place to put things here, actually was not classical
> Unix in the first place.  Sun's Rusty Sandberg is credited with
> inventing the ideas of /var and /sbin which the world gained with SunOS
> 4.0 in 1988, a year before AT&T System 5 Release 4 put it into /usr as
> /usr/sbin with only a symbolic link at /sbin, and two years before
> 4.3BSD Reno adopted it in 1990, the BSD world having to that point used
> /etc for such binaries.  Having things in lots of directories under /usr
> (/usr/amdahl/bin, /usr/ucb, /usr/5bin, /usr/3bin, /usr/eun,
> /usr/stanford/bin, /usr/brl, /usr/bbn, /usr/jerq/bin, and so on)
> *pre-dates* the very idea of /sbin on Unix and was how things were for
> most of the 1980s and the 1970s.
> 
> *
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.unix.questions/g9DsvKQx8h8/QNs0F-mHpR4
> J
> 
> * https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/448799/5132
> 
> *
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.unix.wizards/pLc_jhCUDtU/WD92a732Nx4J
> 
> Almost everything in *lots* of pseudo-user directories under /usr was
> the actual classical Unix way.


Reply to: