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

Re: Feedback needed: How to disable services at startup... and keep them so.



On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 01:33:20 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 08:15:08AM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 Dec 2010 07:37:19 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> 
>> > On 2010-12-08 23:41 +0100, Javier Barroso wrote:
>> > 
>> >> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> You should use "update-rc.d network-manager disable" instead.  See
>> >>> update-rc.d(8).
>> >> I think update-rc.d manpage should then change example which
>> >> Camaleon referenced in her solved post:
>> >>
>> >> Example of disabling a service:
>> >>           update-rc.d -f foobar remove
>> >>           update-rc.d foobar stop 20 2 3 4 5 .
>> > 
>> > That does still work.
>> 
>> Not for me. Read:
>> 
>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2010/12/msg00482.html
>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2010/12/msg00494.html
>> 
>> Or maybe I missed something... again? :-)
> 
> I have not checked recommended way under new concurrent boot system.

Is there is a recommended way? Please tell :-)
 
> But /etc/init.d/foobar is conffile.  This means changes you make is
> preserved and respected.  Whay not insert "exit 0" at the top to disable
> them.  The script is started but does nothing.
> 
> This is a dirty but simple work around :-)
> 
> Anyway, you can be root.  You can do anything.

I basically see two issues here:

1/ We lack? for a "recommended way/Debian way" for disabling scripts 
(this thread is plenty of alternatives and tips for doing it but 
documentation is not very clear on the matter). I think it is important 
for an admin to know how to disable a service, is a must in his/her basic 
day-to-day job list.

2/ Man page of "update-rc.d" provides a method for disabling scripts that 
do not work.

I know a new init boot system is to come (systemd?), but that should not 
be an excuse to do not care on the "mature" one O:-)

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


Reply to: