Bug#370471: use of "invoke-rc.d $PACKAGE stop || exit $?" in prerm scripts
- To: debian bugs <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Bug#370471: use of "invoke-rc.d $PACKAGE stop || exit $?" in prerm scripts
- From: Lars Wirzenius <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:36:30 +0300
- Message-id: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: Lars Wirzenius <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <20060523132153.GB21144@khazad-dum.debian.net>
- References: <2006-05-22T23email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20060523132153.GB21144@khazad-dum.debian.net>
[ Moving discussion from -devel to -policy by creating a new bug. ]
ti, 2006-05-23 kello 10:21 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh kirjoitti:
> On Tue, 23 May 2006, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > I suppose it would be preferable to fix the "stop" target of the init
> There is nothing preferable about it. Stop targets *are* to exit with
> status 0 if the service is already stopped.
> The fact that Debian policy still has this as a "should" clause is just
> cruft that needs to be addressed. There are absolutely no acceptable
> exceptions to either this rule (stopping a stopped service is okay) nor to
> its counterpart (starting an already started service is okay), as far as I
The policy manual says (9.3.2 Writing the scripts):
The init.d scripts should ensure that they will behave sensibly
if invoked with start when the service is already running, or
with stop when it isn't, and that they don't kill
unfortunately-named user processes.
Would it be acceptable to change this to say "must ensure"?
Fundamental truth #3: Communication is difficult.