Re: Upgrading to hamm
On Wed, Aug 05, 1998 at 10:31:13AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> Quoting Javier Fdz-Sanguino Pen~a (jfs@ieeesb.etsit.upm.es):
> > - (this was a real problem that needed some look around) Modules were not
> > started at startup.
> > The problem was that the /etc/init.d file in charge of doing these
> > in the older system was '/etc/init.d/modules', called by /etc/init.d/boot
> > (which allowed both 'modules' or 'modutils'). Alas, Debian 2.0 changed the
> > scheme and no longer accepted modules... the reason?
>
> I'm confused; debian should start all the modules listed in
> /etc/modules, right? Did you edit the /etc/init.d/modules script or
> something?
No,no you and Santiago took me wrong. The /etc/modules file
existed, as always, as well as conf.modules. The /etc/init.d/modules is
the *script* that runs the system in order to
a) run the daemon to do auto-module startup
b) read all modules that need to be run and start them one by one.
The problem is, in Debian 1.3 the script /etc/init.d/boot would call
the script to do this, and would allow either /etc/init.d/modutils or
/etc/init.d/modules. But in hamm, the script is run like any other script in
/etc/init.d by a symlink in /etc/rcS.d, the point is the symlink was made to
/etc/init.d/modutils NOT /etc/init.d/modules, and modutils was NOT provided
by the packages (whomever they are :)
Saludos
Javi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: