[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Init.d script, preventing start of one service



Hello,

On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 01:08:59PM +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> In article <20031115165621.GA1209@grand>,
> Sylvain LE GALL <sylvain.le-gall@polytechnique.org> wrote:
> >On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 01:37:44PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 04:27:03PM +0100, Sylvain LE GALL wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> > 
> >> > In one of the package i maitain i have a config script which begin by
> >> > asking if the service attached to this package need to be run. I use a
> >> > variable ( stored in /etc/default/mldonkey -- LAUNCH_AT_STARTUP="yes" )
> >> > to determine if i need to run the service or not.
> >> > 
> >> > If the variable is set to yes, the init script launch the service,
> >> > otherwise it does nothing. 
> >> > 
> >You think i should simply remove LAUNCH_AT_STARTUP from the init
> >script...
> >
> >Maybe it should be wiser indeed... 
> >
> >In fact, mldonkey server could be run as normal user or as sysadmin (
> >just like fetchmail ). It depends on what does the user want to do with
> >it !
> >
> >So i think i should let LAUNCH_AT_STARTUP... But i keep thinking on it.
> 
> The problem with LAUNCH_AT_STARTUP is that it is the wrong name.
> It not only prevents the service from starting, but it disables
> the entire init script. You can't even run it anymore manually.
> 
> So the variable should probably be called ENABLE_MLDONKEY_SERVER
> or something like that.
> 

Ok, so renaming LAUNC_AT_STARTUP to ENABLE_MLDONKEY_SERVER is enough.

I will do it in future release.

> The reason why someone asked you to control that through
> the startup links instead, is that if it is disabled that
> way, you're still able to start it by hand by running
> /etc/init.d/mldonkey-server.
> 

In fact you can still launch mldonkey_server by hand... Which is the
normal way to launch mlnet... But it is not as nice as using
/etc/init.d/mldonkey

Regard
Sylvain LE GALL



Reply to: