Re: [logcheck] I hear you...
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, Alec Smith wrote:
>On 24 Nov 2001, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
>> Perhaps we should assimilate "chkconfig" then? Embrace and extend
>> it?
>>
>> I kind of like that [Ok] green lights thing they do with the init.d
>> output also. If that is accomplished in a suitably object oriented
>> style; that is, through a documented call interface... the actual
>> output routine can be changed and made to do special things.
>>
>> What ever got done with that dependancy based init script setup that
>> got tossed around for a while? Has anyone ever implemented it?
>
>The whole [OK], [FAILED], etc thing that RedHat does with colors is nice,
>but not really necessary. While some additional things can be useful,
>others are mainly eye candy. I believe adding the kind of success/failure
>system RedHat uses is mainly eyecandy.
THAT'S NOT A REDHAT-ISM. HP-UX has done it since at least v8, released
in '95.
>Personally I've never had any problems with the current system startup
>script system, other than a tool like chkconfig being useful. Actually,
>I'd be willing to bet update-rc.d could be extended to support similar
>functionality.
>
>
>
--
You have paid nothing for the preceding, therefore it's worth every penny
you've paid for it: if you did pay for it, might I remind you of the
immortal words of Phineas Taylor Barnum regarding fools and money?
Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!
Reply to: