On Sun, 18 Jul 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Section 3.3 currently makes reference to /etc/rc?.d as containing
> symlinks to the scripts in /etc/init.d, and a detailed description of
> how init uses them. It goes on, in section 3.3.3, to say:
> A program is provided, `update-rc.d', to make it easier for package
> maintainers to arrange for the proper creation and removal of
> `/etc/rc<n>.d' symbolic links from their `postinst' and `postrm'
> scripts.
> which implicitly allows the maintainer to create their own symlinks
> manually.
> However, in the light of Joey's file-rc package, this section of
> policy ought to be reworded to make it absolutely clear (and it
> hasn't been recently) that the description of the /etc/rc?.d
> directories in section 3.3.1 is only what is used when the standard
> setup is being used, and that the *only* permissible way to create
> the symlinks is to use update-rc.d, as the symlinks don't make any
> sense when file-rc is being used.
You're right. Until I read your mail, I thought that the following
sentence of the policy
You should use this script to make changes to `/etc/rc<n>.d' and
_never_ include any `/etc/rc<n>.d' symbolic links in the actual
archive.
would make this clear, but after reading it again, this only forbids
the maintainer to include the symlinks in the package itself, but it
doesn't forbid to create the symlinks manually (without using
update-rc.d) in postinst.
So I (as the actual maintainer of file-rc) second your proposal, to
change the policy in a way, that forbids to create the symlinks in a
way different to update-rc.d.
Ciao
Roland
--
* roland@spinnaker.de * http://www.spinnaker.de/ *
PGP: 1024/DD08DD6D 2D E7 CC DE D5 8D 78 BE 3C A0 A4 F1 4B 09 CE AF
Attachment:
pgpm52QJpgpim.pgp
Description: PGP signature