Bug#791611: marked as done (lintian: Sysv init script false positives on service files)
Your message dated Mon, 06 Jul 2015 15:54:05 -0400
with message-id <27100705.qLlWv1KCcn@kitterma-e6430>
and subject line Nevermind
has caused the Debian Bug report #791611,
regarding lintian: Sysv init script false positives on service files
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
791611: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=791611
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.32
Severity: normal
I just uploaded the first version of opendkim that shipped a systemd sevice
file. Lintian was seriously unhappy with it:
opendkim
W executable-not-elf-or-script
etc/init.d/opendkim.service
etc/init.d/opendkim.service
E init.d-script-does-not-implement-required-option
etc/init.d/opendkim.service force-reload
etc/init.d/opendkim.service force-reload
etc/init.d/opendkim.service restart
etc/init.d/opendkim.service restart
etc/init.d/opendkim.service start
etc/init.d/opendkim.service start
etc/init.d/opendkim.service stop
etc/init.d/opendkim.service stop
W init.d-script-does-not-source-init-functions
etc/init.d/opendkim.service
etc/init.d/opendkim.service
W init.d-script-missing-lsb-section
etc/init.d/opendkim.service
etc/init.d/opendkim.service
W script-in-etc-init.d-not-registered-via-update-rc.d
etc/init.d/opendkim.service
etc/init.d/opendkim.service
Either I did it wrong and installed the service file in the wrong place, or I
don't think these tests should fire on services file.
Scott K
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 50983
--- End Message ---
Reply to: