On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 10:59:35AM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Alexander Berntsen > <alexan...@plaimi.net> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > On 11/12/13 21:41, William Hubbs wrote: > >> My thought is to rename our "rc" to "openrc", since that would be > >> unique. > > orc is shorter and more punny (nice excuse for designing an orcish cow > > mascot). > > > > On 11/12/13 22:04, William Hubbs wrote:> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at > > 10:47:49PM +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > >>> are you going to rename also rc-service and rc-update? > >> > >> No, there isn't a need for that, just "rc". > > Please rename all of them, to provide uniform naming. This way, typing > > orc, and tab-tabing in BASH will give you a list of orc-related > > executables, just like with rc now. > > > > That makes no sense; there is almost no reason to manually invoke the > "rc" binary currently, an Gentoo users are already familiar with names > like "rc-update" and "service". There are reasons to run the rc binary directly; this is how you should be changing runlevels.
> Renaming everything just forces users to learn new command names for no > reason. Right, there is no reason to rename everything. In git, what I've done is rename rc to openrc and provide rc as a backward compatibility symlink. I agree with the comment earlier in the thread; debating the name is just bikeshedding. William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
