Re: better make a standard for /etc/*/*_not_to_be_run
On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Thomas Hood wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 16:46:26 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > It is not broken at all. Due to the way sysv-rc works, no symlink
> > at all means "undefined state". If you go to a runlevel where
> > something is started (It has a S symlink), then back to a
> > runlevel with no symlink, the service is left alone (i.e. started).
>
> I agree that if there is no symlink for a runlevel then the
> state of the service (running/stopped) should not be changed
> on entering that runlevel.
That means the state of that service is UNDEFINED for that runlevel, if you
need to treat runlevels as atomic entities.
> The problem originally reported in #156161 is that invoke-rc.d
> _starts_ a service in a runlevel which _lacks_ a symlink.
The reason for which I explained already.
> > Anyway, no symlink = undefined behaviour.
>
> This contradicts what you said above: no symlink = no change.
"No change" means you need to know the previous status, if any, of ALL
services, across runlevel changes. This is NOT how sysv-rc works, so
"undefined" it is.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: