Re: Request for Comments: Standardize enabling/disabling of system services
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 01:21:47PM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> > That said, if the runlevel editor is appropriately integrated with the
> > system, it doesn't have to limit itself to waiting for the service to be
> > installed before setting a policy for the service. The editor could divert
> > update-rc.d (or otherwise integrate with it), to ensure both that the
> > runlevel editor always knows the intended policy for the service and that
> > any global policy set by the admin is respected at the time update-rc.d is
> > called (i.e., modifying the arguments before passing them to the diverted
> > update-rc.d).
> Indeed. Didn't think about the possibility of diversions. I guess
> diverting the init scripts could be a solution (besides that it needs
> some further work to the service managing utility). Then I'd
> whole-heartedly agree with getting rid of RUN_* variables for the sake
> of consistence.
Not diverting init scripts, only diverting update-rc.d and installing a
wrapper around it. Diverting init scripts would be full of fail.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/