Re: Should Debian use lsb init-functions?
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 09:25:31AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Wed, 04 May 2005, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > I think it would be better if we simply made rc capture initscripts'
> > > standard output (and exit status) and formatted it in such a way that
> > > bootup messages were prettier.
> > That sounds like an ugly and error-prone hack to me. Not something we
> > want one of our most important systems to be working with.
> Ugly hack? Not at all, it is good design.
What have you been smoking?
> At wrost, you get human-parseable output that, while it does not make enough
> sense for the system to color it green or red, won't break anything (i.e.
> exactly what we have right now).
... in which case you'll get an output that looks similar to a current
RedHat boot, except for those one or two lines that look completely out
of touch with the rest, and the 'Parse Error' yell right below that.
Sounds ugly to me.
The alternative would be to have a transitional period in which
initscripts are being moved to having lsb-style functions, but where
the output of those functions is programmed to behave the same way our
current initscripts do. That should not pose a problem.
> As for error prone, have you ever tried to audit our initscripts? A
> controlled rewrite of all of them would benefit us a lot anyway.
I'm not contesting that. On the contrary.
But capturing an initscript's output and trying to parse that is a
*bad*, *bad*, *bad* idea.
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond