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

Re: patch to update-rc.d

On 11:54 Mon 20 Dec 2004, Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels@cistron.nl> wrote:

> 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".

I will take a look at this since it sounds interesting.

> >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
> system.

That was my initial reaction too, I only wanted a simple option within
update-rc.d to list current configuration quickly. Dependency based
system will change many things.

> 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.
> Mike.

I agree with this, is there a repository somewhere which specifies
initial configuration done through maintainer postinst scriptlet. I know
I can get it from /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.postinst, but is someone
maintaining the "default" order of things if there is a full debian
install done (which is silly of course).


Reply to: