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

Re: Policy proposal: 'local-foo' for system-specific init.d fil



on Tue, Apr 02, 2002, Osamu Aoki (debian@aokiconsulting.com) wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 10:39:21PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > 
> > On 01-Apr-2002 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Sun, 31 Mar 2002, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > >> This question (where do I put local init.d scripts) comes up enough that
> > >> a policy ought IMVAO be set for it.
> > > 
> > > Hmm... well, ALL we need in policy is to define that no Debian packages
> > > should ever use an initscript ID prefixed by local.
> > > 
> > > Is there reason for more? policy is not a user's guide, after all.
> > > 
> > 
> > the key is to both ensure this behaviour works in Debian (perhaps via policy)
> > and have this documented clearly and conspicuously in as many places as
> > possible.  The question pops up every 3 weeks or so on the debian-user list.
> 
> Actually, this question is answered by FAQ which is hard to find.
> 
> http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/ch-customizing.html#s-custombootscripts
> 
> Problem with FAQ is it is old.  (Potato release days contents)
> 
> Policy to prefixed scripts is nice.  FAQ needs to be updated if so.

The only real issue with the answer in the FAQ is that there is a
(slight) chance of a name collision down the road.  Granted, if your
init.d scripts are colliding, there are also probably binaries with
similar names, but....

The local-<foo> policy would avoid this issue.  That and set /usr/local
ahead of /usr and /bin on your search path ;-).

Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>           http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
   The Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act:
     Feinstein's answer to Enron envy.
       http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cbdtpa/hollings.s2048.032102.html

Attachment: pgp4rWcG2OgAs.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: