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

Re: patch to update-rc.d

In article <[🔎] 20041220105345.GD24468@khazad-dum.debian.net>,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh  <hmh@debian.org> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, Rajesh Deo wrote:
>> I am currently developing a perl script that lists rc?.d
>> configuration and you can find it here:
>> README shows the typical usage and expected output. Also available
>> is a patch to update-rc.d that includes the functions from the script.
>> This enhances update-rc.d.pl to have a rc configuration listing
>> functionality. It is however _not_ emulating Red Hat's chkconfig and is
>> based on suggestions given in this discussion:
>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/12/msg00743.html
>> It also lists active services in /etc/inetd.conf and
>> /etc/xinetd.conf and /etc/xinetd.d. Apart from that it has a option that
>> will sort a given rc?.d to present the complete execution order within
>> that runlevel.
>Please change that to two separate programs. It is not the place of
>update-rc.d to get anywhere close to inetd.
>Also, the output needs to be machine-parseable. Update-rc.d is for
>maintaienr scripts, not the end-user (if it can be used by the end-user,
>that's just fine).

There's already something in sysvinit-2.86/debian/sysv-rc called
"saveconfig" that does exactly that. I haven't integrated it into
update-rc.d yet because the plan still is to move to a dependency-based
system for "edge".

>So, we need good user tools to work with the initscript system (maybe
>interfacing to update-rc.d, maybe doing things directly as long as it has
>some sanity checks to make sure it does not try to do the wrong thing on a
>system that is using file-rc, for example).

Again, if we go for a dependency based system for edge it's not
really useful to build all kinds of new tools for the current

OTOH, perhaps it will turn out that LSB/LCC support means we must
keep the current system and cannot move to dependency-based at all.
I don't know. This needs a lot more thought, but not right now though.


Reply to: