[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: sysvinit: rc vs. r2d2 bahavior

Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>In fact you might say that /etc/rc6.d/Sxxx is the complement of /etc/rcS.d

We both agree that the current purpose of /etc/rc6.d/S* is not to start
anything. I just think it's a hack to hard-code the purpose of a runlevel
like that.

I also think it's a bug in sysvinit and mdutils (raidtools too?) that
the urandom and mdutils (raid too?) kill scripts are run from a S*

I understand your rationale for doing it this way, but the numbers should
have a purpose, and reorganizing them might be a worthy goal. On my system I
don't have anything after K91 (WHY does inn need to stop so late? apache is
even worse - it stops after sysklogd!) so unless something is using K95
there's enough reorganization room.

[cue the subliminal chanting for run-scripts, which can end all this number
horror, assuming I can ever finish it]

>Well we need to do both if everyone is so upset about this (though
>I still can't quite see why). But not in slink. In potato, perhaps.

Of course.
Robert Woodcock - rcw@debian.org
"Unix and C are the ultimate computer viruses" -- Richard Gabriel

Reply to: