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

Re: 38

On 27.08.2010 10:27, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi, le Fri 27 Aug 2010 10:21:06 +0200, a écrit :
On 27.08.2010 10:09, posion bit wrote:
look one so simple in /etc/init.d/rc

                         for i in /etc/rc$runlevel.d/K$level*
                                 # Check if the script is there.
                                 [ ! -f $i ]&&   continue

The [ ! -f $i ] is not going to make what she was meaning (thinking
she know what she was doing)

why no?

IMHO I still think it is save and intentional.

Not if I have a "/etc/rc2.d/K03my damn daemon"

Which is again the debian rules and the LSB rules about
naming the init.d scripts.

We really need to make some assumptions (and usually they
are documented).
Anyway only root could abuse (and only root could create
such missnamed file/symlink).

BTW the real bug is that we have rc?.d directories in etc.
Really these are not configuration files (of symlinks),
but should be created by update-rc.d. The update-rc.d
should enforce filenames.


Reply to: