Re: Problems with init
On Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 10:02:20AM +0200, Radovan Garabik wrote:
> I mean, when you are starting e.g. nfs-server, it depends on
> nfs-common, that depends on portmap, and that depends on networking,
> so these scripts are run in correct order.
> And when I decide to stop networking, does it know to stop first
> nfs-server, then nfs-common, them portmap and finally networking?
Init or rc*.d scripts should not now anything about dependencies,
in my mind. It is the thing that package management software of
administrator should decide. Both of the inits allow one to create
such a system of scripts. In the case of sysvinit you (or some
program, update-rc.d, for example) place S[number] and K[number]
scripts in the needed order so when, for example, init is on the
runlevel 6 it would stop all the services in the needed order,
and start umounting only after everything is stopped (that's the
way everything is done right now :)
So, in my mind, init should _not_ know about any services dependencies,
since it's the thing that it's not designed to do. KISS principle.
And again, porting and using sysvinit is a Good Thing (tm).
Using scripts is a good idea, but for example, we miss telinit.
Init is not just a thing that starts your services ;)
> Of all the runlevels there are, I ever used only 2 (default), 6 (reboot),
> 0 (halt), 1 (single user).
> So there for the need for runleves :-)
Me too. But it's not the reason not to support the others :)
--
Regards, Wartan.
echo "Your stdio isn't very std."
-- Larry Wall in Configure from the perl distribution
Reply to: