On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 12:05:19 +0200 Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Having an init.d only with a modprobe is the wrong design. What makes you say that? How is it different from having an /etc/modules.d/ivtv? I would say that reflexive, knee-jerk reaction "let's add .d" to any problem is a recipe for wrong design which produces redundancies. Don't forget that it's easy to introduce entities, not so easy to get rid of them. > And there are other modules that need to be before any init.d scripts, > like capabilities modules whose absence will break named etc. The named's number is 55. Surely a slot to load capabilities before named can be found. So far I did not see a good reason to keep /etc/rc.modules around in this thread (with a possible exception of pcspkr, because it plugs into HID; but even there a smart kernel patch ought to help). -- Pete
