Re: insserv + apache2 + bind9 = pain
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am not developer of insserve ...
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 01:37:48AM -0800, Mike Bird wrote:
>> On Wed December 29 2010 00:13:04 Camaleón wrote:
> ...
>> Thanks for looking into this. I still fail to see why saving half a
>> second a year on server booting is worth inflecting days of drudgery
>> on tens of thousands of sysadmins.
>>
>> So yet again, why is Debian forcing this horrible change? The old
>> sysv-rc is not hard to support alongside file-rc. Why abuse the power
>> of Debian dependencies to push this bad idea on sysadmins who don't
>> want it? Why can't we keep the excellent debugged working reliable
>> sysv-rc from Lenny? If some people want to use insserv let them, but
>> don't force people to go through this nonsense!
>>
>> insserv simply throws away all the hard work by Debian Developers over
>> many many years that went into tuning the default rc2.d/Snn priorities.
>
> As I recall, even with old boot system, boot order default was always
> hotly disputed topc among package maintainer. This ordering default
> choice is independent issue from moving to dependancy based boot
> suystem. Moving such default took good amount of package script.
> I think dependancy based boot system made this a bit more
> complicated for some case but made easy for some other case.
>
> Quite franky, complaining here does not make situation better. If you
> find some issue to the package such as Documentation etc., please file
> bug with constructive proposal.
>
> Thank you,
>
I think he has found some issues, and listed them quite clearly a few
posts up. I also don't think he wants to get involved in bug squashing
the insserv system, he seems to want to go back to Snn Knn which seems
like an entirely reasonable request. I'll be interested to see if its
possible.
AM
Reply to: