Re: Policy rewrite: chaps 7-10
Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Agreed. I presume that ldconfig exists on all systems, though.
All systems Debian currently runs on anyway. I kind of expect that to
change at some point though.
> Please explain; I don't know what you mean here.
I'll have to get back to you on that :)
> Are we going to follow the LSB for runlevels? Is there anything else
> we should be following it for? This should definitely be a separate
> proposal.
I certainly hope we are going to follow it: Debian is in an excellent
position to be a demonstration LSB complient system, and I would hate
to miss that opportunity.
LSB isn't finished yet though, and I expect more changes to changes
to be needed at some point. People interesting in policy should definitely
try to keep up with LSB as well
> But it makes no sense to force-reload or stop or restart checkfs.sh.
> What about /etc/rcS.d/S40networking? Or /etc/rc[2-5].d/S99rmnologin?
> These two cases show that it's pretty close, but not quite all the way
> there.
networking should move out of rcS.d, since LSB specifies runlevels
without networking which is impossible of networking is in /etc/rcS.d .
> But should force-reload be a "must"?
I would say so.
Wichert.
--
________________________________________________________________
/ Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \
| wichert@cistron.nl http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Reply to: