Re: Sysv-rc (Urgent)
Hint: your mails are easier to read if you put a blank line between
citations and your reply.
On 2009-09-06 21:47 +0200, David Baron wrote:
> On Sunday 06 September 2009 21:23:10 debian-user-digest-
> request@lists.debian.org wrote:
>> > The upgrade from sid finds it unsafe to change to dependency based boot
>> > and leaves it unconfigured with a couple of missing .rc files.
>>
>> What are .rc files?
> Reinstalling over testing did not flag them again!
That does not answer my question, I still do not know what ".rc files"
are in the first place.
> Interesting that the problems preventing the "migration" are:
> 1. bittorent left obsolete init.d script I have no need for bittorent,
> actually.
> 2. jackd left behind and obsolete init.d script. I do not start jackd using
> this script since many audio things do not work with it. I need to use jackd
> manually.
> 3. Mono-xsp left behind an obsolete init.d script. This is a standalone
> asp.net knockoff--I can remove this as well since were I to use mono-xsp, I
> would do so using apache.
> 4. Package pcscd removed by not purged. I am purging it.
> 5. Reniced removed by not purged. I use and instead of this one. Purge it.
> 6. Timidity left behind and obsolete init.d script.
> 7. Virtual Box 2.0 removed by not purge (OK, already, change "by" to "but")--
> Sun should fix this. Vbox upgrades do not replace the old one--one must remove
> it and then install the new one. Shame on them. Purging them.
> 8. K20hddtemp missing LSB tags and overrides. The only one really relevant?
>
> Purging bittorrent and the othes leaves me with obsolete init.d scripts from
> jackd and timidity. I want these packages but not necessarily the init.d
> scripts to start them. (In fact, Timidity now has a separate daemon package.)
> So how do I fix this.
Remove the obsolete scripts by hand.
> Then there is the k20hddtemp.
You should upgrade the hddtemp package, the missing LSB info has been
fixed in version 0.3-beta15-41.
> I have had insserv around for a while but never used it because I was afraid
> to end up with an unbootable system and no recourse. Since insserv warns that
> one cannot turn back while debian maintainers say best to go ahead .... what
> to do?
The warning that the system may become unbootable is in fact greatly
exaggerated, I have yet to see a bug report about that. Most problems
with incorrect LSB headers are more subtle and only play a role under
relatively obscure circumstances (like having /usr on NFS).
Sven
Reply to: