Re: Two-part initialization?

[sharkey@superk.physics.sunysb.edu]

> (1)
> Have one init script and have this init script be invoked in two
> places.

Yuck.

> (2)
> Have two completely different init scripts. I rejected this because
> both scripts aren't that much different and there would be much
> redundancy.

Then have three scripts.  Put the common common code into a third script
which is not called directly by init, but have the two init scripts call
the third script.  This avoids redundancy and is quite clear, I think.

I think that's your best option.

Eric