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

Re: NCID with no rcS.d



Sven Joachim wrote:

> On 2011-11-24 17:51 +0100, lrhorer wrote:
> 
>> Arno Schuring wrote:
>>
>>> lrhorer (lrhorer@satx.rr.com on 2011-11-24 03:38 -0600):
>>>> OK, so here's the deal.  I compiled and installed ncid on one of my
>>>> Debian servers  Everything seems to be working just fine.  There's
>>>> one small item, though.  When I took the init scripts and ran
>>>> update-rc.d, it gave me a warning saying "stop runlevel arguments
>>>> (0
>>>> 1 6) do not match LSB Default-Stop values (S 0 1 6)".  When I
>>>> looked at the scripts, they have the line
>>>> 
>>>> # Default-Stop:      S 0 1 6
>>>> 
>>> [..]
>>>> First of all, why did the routine put up that warning and fail to
>>>> create the links?
>>> insserv doesn't create the links unless explicitly asked to do so.
>>> By default (as it's called from dpkg), it only determines start/stop
>>> ordering.
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure how those links are populated initially. It could be
>>> that the package provides them, and is missing that one link.
>>
>> The package didn't provide them, I did.  This was compiled from
>> source and then I ran update-rc.d:
>>
>> RAID-Server:/etc/init.d# update-rc.d ncidd.init defaults
>> update-rc.d: warning: ncidd.init stop runlevel arguments (0 1 6) do
>> not match LSB Default-Stop values (S 0 1 6)
>>  Adding system startup for /etc/init.d/ncidd.init ...
>>    /etc/rc0.d/K20ncidd.init -> ../init.d/ncidd.init
>>    /etc/rc1.d/K20ncidd.init -> ../init.d/ncidd.init
>>    /etc/rc6.d/K20ncidd.init -> ../init.d/ncidd.init
>>    /etc/rc2.d/S20ncidd.init -> ../init.d/ncidd.init
>>    /etc/rc3.d/S20ncidd.init -> ../init.d/ncidd.init
>>    /etc/rc4.d/S20ncidd.init -> ../init.d/ncidd.init
>>    /etc/rc5.d/S20ncidd.init -> ../init.d/ncidd.init
> 
>From these numbers I conclude that you're still using legacy boot
>order,
> and in that case update-rc.d relies on the arguments given to it,
> ignoring the LSB headers.  With dependency-based boot it uses the
> values
> in the LSB headers instead.  See the update-rc.d manpage for details.

Yeah,I didn't spot the existence of the .legacy-bootordering control 
file.  It's easy to miss, since it's hidden.


Reply to: