Re: Some ideas about the Debian Runlevel System
#include <hallo.h>
* Will Lowe [Wed, Jan 29 2003, 11:30:29AM]:
> The dependency thing is, IMHO, one of those things that sounds great
> at first but is isn't worth the trouble it would take to maintain.
> sysvinit gives you a way to manage dependencies -- just number things
> right! It's a bit crude, but MUCH less pain than trying to define
> "networking" ... does that mean that the physical interfaces are up or
> that IPSec has finished negotiating SAs and Zebra's bgp sessions are
> up?
Then you should define the dependencies more precise, that is it. In you
case, we would have one dependency script called "base-networking" and
"full networking". Or, based on the current packages, the first would be
called "ifup", and the second "networkup". Networkup could also be a
dependency on a set of scripts and every package installing additional
networking functionality could add its init script to that list (eg. VPN
daemons, DynDNS clients, etc.). That is all only a question of a proper
(internal mini-)policy, and this can work among the maintainers if
several developers come together, write it down and make it public
somewhere.
Gruss/Regards,
Eduard.
--
"Das Schwein trägt seinen Namen nicht umsonst" - Stilblüten aus
Kinderaufsätzen: (Mythen, Dichtungen und Geschichten)
...
Das Trojanische Pferd war nur außen ein Pferd. Innen war es ein
Wohnmobil.
Reply to: