Bug#208010: [PROPOSAL] init script LSB 1.3 compliance

[Martin Godisch <martin@godisch.de>]

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 17:33:17 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:

> > --- debian-policy-3.6.1.0.orig/policy.sgml	2003-08-19 14:32:23.000000000 +0200
> > +++ debian-policy-3.6.1.0/policy.sgml	2003-09-02 06:53:48.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -5362,13 +5362,16 @@
> >  	      <tag><tt>force-reload</tt></tag>
> >  	      <item>cause the configuration to be reloaded if the
> >  		  service supports this, otherwise restart the
> > -		  service.</item>
> > +		  service,</item>
> > +
> > +	      <tag><tt>status</tt></tag>
> > +	      <item>print the current status of the service.</item>
> 
> This one can be very tricky to implement correctly,

Yes, if the daemon doesn't support it itself and the maintainer is
willing to implement more than "unknown" in this case.

> and may require more code than what we would like in a config file.

It doesn't need to be in the init script. The init script may call some
helper program, which provides the necessary information.

> A reference to the section below describing the output and return value
> is needed.

"See next paragraph"? Not necessarily...

> > +	      <tag>8-99</tag>
> > +	      <item>reserved for future LSB use,</item>
> 
> > +	      <tag>100-149</tag>
> > +	      <item>reserved for distribution use,</item>
> > +	      <tag>150-199</tag>
> > +	      <item>reserved for application use,</item>
> > +	      <tag>200-254</tag>
> > +	      <item>reserved.</item>
> 
> Does the above make sense in the context of Debian Policy ? 

You think this can be better?

> > +	    </taglist>
> > +	    All error messages should be printed on standard error. All status
> > +	    messages should be printed on standard output. (This does not
> > +	    prevent scripts from calling logging functions.)
> > +	  </p>
> 
> This paragraph should clarify what is a 'error message' as opposed to
> a 'status message'

Possibly, what do you suggest?

Kind regards,

Martin