The /etc/rc.d/ construction is, AFAIK, a beast of Red Hat origin. Recent version (starting with 7.x, maybe?) symlink /etc/rc.d/init.d and the various rc#.d directories directly into /etc as a convenience for people who are used to the more traditional SysV layout, but functionally it's always been SysV. They do include an "rc.local" script which functions much like the analogous file in BSD, but it's called just like any other SysV init script.
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 02:17:01PM -0700, Robert L. Harris wrote: > > > Ok then. When talking about locations of files, paths (/etc/init.d/ vs > /etc/rc.d/*) > what term would be correct? > > > Thus spake Alec ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > On Wednesday 09 January 2002 03:46 pm, Robert L. Harris wrote: > > > > > RedHat: > > > > > System layout is BSD > > > > Nay. IMHO, "SysV layout" refers to a bunch of symlinks that are called with > > "start" or "stop" arguments, while "BSD layout" refers to some sort of > > unified script. I prefer the former and, AFAIK, both RH and Debian use > > SysV-style start-up scripts. > > > > Alec > > > > :wq! > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Robert L. Harris | Micros~1 : > Senior System Engineer | For when quality, reliability > at RnD Consulting | and security just aren't > \_ that important! > DISCLAIMER: > These are MY OPINIONS ALONE. I speak for no-one else. > FYI: > perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(115),10);' > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
