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

Re: The future of non-dependency-based boot

]] Roger Leigh 

> Could you provide examples please?  If there are init scripts which
> it can't handle, that's a bug.  Either in insserv or (more likely)
> the scripts.

It fails to handle the case where something provides a virtual facility,
at least.  It also seems to think that /etc/init.d/../rc2.d/S30gdm3 on
my system is «corrupt or invalid», without further information.  (It's
for some reason a normal file rather than a symlink, but I don't see why
that should matter.)

> This has been partly discussed in #594917, but you haven't
> followed up there in response to the last comment.

> Based on this bug, I think it's perfectly reasonable for sysv-rc
> to manage the links; whether sysvinit is or is not running is not
> part of the question here, IMO.  Given that systemd users are for
> the most part going to be users migrating from a sysvinit/sysv-rc/
> insserv configuration, it's not unexpected that insserv will be
> managing the links.  systemd should be able to cope with
> insserv managing the links shouldn't it?

systemd is perfectly able to cope.  It doesn't care about the numbering,
but uses the dependency information from the header of the script
instead and only uses S/K to determine whether a service should be
running or not.

What I'm complaining about is it's continued insistence on trying to
convert to another way of ordering the links when it's unable to do so,
especially when said complaining is in the form of a debconf error on
each and every upgrade of the package.

Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are

Reply to: