status of initscript conversions to lsb standard
Matthias Saou
thias at spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net
Mon Aug 13 08:20:59 UTC 2007
Hans de Goede wrote :
> Some time ago many bugs where filed against packages with initscripts, asking
> to make these initscripts lsb compliant.
>
> After that there was some discussion if this was really a necessary operation,
> as it wasn't sure yet if we would be switching to a startup replacement which
> requires lsb compliance scripts. The outcome of the discussion then was to wait
> with converting the scripts till things would be more clear.
>
> Are things more clear now, are we going to switch init, and to a version which
> makes these changes necessary, or should I close those bugs open against my
> packages?
I have the exact same doubts myself :-)
I really think the "Unanswered questions" from the wiki page should be
addressed first :
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FCNewInit/Initscripts
As an example, I still don't know what the correct/best syntax is for a
service to not be run by default in any runlevels :
- No "Default-Stop" or "Default-Start"?
- "Default-Stop: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6"?
- "Default-Start:" and "Default-Stop: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6"?
- Something else?
Matthias
--
Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/
Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) - Linux kernel 2.6.22.1-41.fc7
Load : 0.84 0.67 0.50
More information about the devel
mailing list