> If you're really dedicated to that style of doing things, that would be
> all there is to rc.local, no?  

Yes.

> (Also, surely you mean `ls /etc/rc.d`,
> not `ls /etc/rc.d/*`.)

That would also be a bit dangerous.  What emacs ~ files etc?
And even if you wanted that, why waste an ls process? 

My rc.sh does (esentially):

for f in ${dir}/${class}*
do
	case $f in
	*.bak|*.old|*~)	;;
	*.sh)	. $f;;
	*)	/bin/sh $f $arg;;
	esac
done

Its the sourcing of the .sh files that gives much of the flexibility.

--sjg