Re: solving the network-manager-in-gnome problem
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 01:50:58PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2012-07-22 11:43:14 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > ENABLE/DISABLE switches are *ugly*,
>
> I disagree. ENABLE/DISABLE switches have some advantages: they are
> more readable than a set of symlinks, allow all the settings of some
> service to be grouped in a single place, and can be managed more
> easily by VCS software.
While this is true, it's not the way that sysvinit works. Other
systems such as systemd may provide such facilities natively, but
initscripts do not. If you're going to use sysvinit, then you
should just use update-rc.d foo disable to disable it.
> > as their effect is not limited to boottime changes. Especially in
> > case of packages who ship with such a variable set to disable by
> > default, this is very annoying.
>
> The user may not want a service he didn't request or he hasn't
> configured yet to be enabled by default. For instance, some packages
> may be installed automatically (due to dependencies), or one may want
> the client, but not the server. Such services should be disabled by
> default.
This is not the general consensus--by default daemons are started if
the package is installed. This has been already debated extensively
many times over. Irrespective of whether your personal opinion is
that this is a good or bad thing, that's just the way it is at present.
Regards,
Roger
--
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools
`- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800
Reply to: