On 09/22/2010 03:25 PM, Kent West wrote:
On 09/22/2010 01:47 PM, Wayne Topa wrote:On 09/22/2010 02:21 PM, Kent West wrote:On 09/22/2010 12:09 PM, Wayne Topa wrote:On 09/22/2010 12:41 PM, Carlos Mennens wrote:What is the deal now with 'restarting' networking services in Debian 5 & Squeeze? I use to be able to run the command: /etc/init.d/networking restart Now when I do so in Debian, I get a strange error: Running /etc/init.d/networking restart is deprecated because it may not enable again some interfaces ... (warning). Reconfiguring network interfaces...done.It has been discussed here before. You might want to go, as many do, to the list archives for the complete story. Google would have found your answer as well invoke-rc.d networking restartBut I'm glad it was asked here. I had noticed the same behavior several months ago, but just worked around it. I'm glad to see an answer fly by me when I wasn't looking for it. However, when I run this command:westk@westek:~$ sudo invoke-rc.d networking restart [sudo] password for westk: Running /etc/init.d/networking restart is deprecated because it may not enable again some interfaces ... (warning). Reconfiguring network interfaces...done.Seems like we still get a deprecation message.I forgot to mention, my bad, that I am running testing and Sid.And, I'm still curious about why the change, and why when something is deprecated, the coders will bother to say the instruction is deprecated but don't give any clue as to what to use instead.I assume you are running lenny. I don't know if it, sysv-rc, is the same as in testing/Sid. Do have svsv-re Version 288dsf-12?In /etc/apt/sources.list I have unstable, testing, stable respositories, in that order. I just a while ago did an aptitude update/dist-upgrade. Version: 2.86.ds1-61
What you have in /etc/apt/sources.list does not mean you are running all of them! What does 'less /etc/debian_version' return? That will tell you which version your running.
Have you read the sysv-rc doc's? The man page and the README-sysv-rc.d.gz has some useful information.No, that was my bad. I was just responding off-the-cuff to this thread. I saw what you had written, tried it, got the deprecation message still, ran "invoke-rc.d -?" (man, that name is hard to remember and to type) and just responded to that help screen instead of going to the man pages like I should have done. (I'm just irritable that I haven't been able to get dual-monitor working again on my box for the past year since an upgrade, and am frustrated that things are less intuitive than they could be. But that's a selfish thing in me; I should be grateful to the devs for providing us a better OS in so many ways than what the rest of the world uses.) Reading the man page, I see that invoke-rc.d (have I mentioned that's hard to remember and type?) is just an extra layer between the admin and the running of the /etc/init.d/ scripts, for the purpose of sanity checks mostly (don't start a daemon during an upgrade if you're not in the proper run-level, etc). I assume one of those things that this extra level would do is check which network adapters should be activated and which should not, a process that would not occur if you simply ran "/etc/init.d/networking restart". It adds some complexity, but I can see the value in that complexity. The only remaining issue then is why I'm still getting the deprecation message.
Because I suppose you are running lenny. If so, you will really have a mess on your hands if you continue haveing the Squeeze (testing) and Sid sources in your sources.list. When Squeeze goes to stable 'that's' when you will have to add the squeeze sources. Instead you could put backports in your sources.list. One last suggestion. Install the debian-reference package now and get acquainted with it. You will learn a lot more about Debian there than any other single source of information.
Perhaps it is simply a leftover in an older version of sysv-rc
than what you're running. (But then that introduces on more "only" remaining question; if we're both running sid, why do I have an older version than you have?) (I'm not really looking for answers at the moment; it's more of a slight curiosity right now.)
Are you new to this list? We had a Kent West here for the last 5-6 years so I assumed that's how you were. The reason I ask is that he would know that we do not reply to the sender of messages, we reply to the list! That way everyone gets to see how to fix problems. Please remember that in the future.
I am sending this back to the list.
Wayne