Re: rc-update() 1.2
Hello
a bug has been identified which does make it necessary to update the above.
--
Regards,
Thilo
4096R/0xC70B1A8F
721B 1BA0 095C 1ABA 3FC6 7C18 89A4 A2A0 C70B 1A8F
_myservice()
{
local cur prev words cword
_init_completion || return
if [[ $cword -ge 1 ]]; then
_services
[[ -e /etc/mandrake-release ]] && _xinetd_services
fi
}
_rc-update()
{
local cur prev words cword
_init_completion || return
if [[ $cword -eq 1 && $prev == ?(*/)rc-update ]]; then
COMPREPLY=( $( compgen -W 'enable disable remove add del show' -- "$cur" ) )
else
_services
fi
}
builtin complete -F _rc-update rc-update
builtin complete -F _myservice rc-add rc-del rc-show
rc-update()
{
case "${1}" in
enable|add)
# This action here shall enable a initsrcipt.
# This is done by (re)enforcing the defaults described as LSB headers.
#
for i in "${@:2}";
do
find /etc/rc[S0-6].d/ -iname "*${i}" -type l -exec unlink {} +
insserv -d ${i};
done
;;
disable|remove|del)
# Here the the initscript gets disabled.
# This is done by place a single stop link in /etc/rc1.d/
# Due to this a package update wont change this settings.
# It has be mentioned that not used stop-actions do not hit performance
# read https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/04/msg00829.html
# You can modify the 'stop=1' here according if you like.
#
for i in "${@:2}";
do
find /etc/rc[S0-6].d/ -iname "*${i}" -type l -exec unlink {} +
insserv -f ${i},start=,stop=1;
done
;;
show)
# Display current state of <service>
#
printf "rlvl\tslot\tservive\n"
for i in "${@:2}";
do
find /etc/rc[S0-6].d/ -iname "*${i}" -type l | sed 's#^/etc/rc##;s#\.d/S#\tS#;s#\.d/K#\tK#;s#\([SK][0-9][0-9]\)#\1\t#' | sort -k2
done
;;
*)
printf "usage: rc-update enable|disable|show <service1> <service2> ... <serviceN>\n\n"
printf "enable: Use default runlevels as defined in the scripts.\n"
printf "disable: Remove the listed scripts from all runlevels.\n"
printf "show: Output runlevel and sequence information of service.\n"
;;
esac
}
alias rc-add="rc-update add"
alias rc-del="rc-update del"
alias rc-show="rc-update show"
Reply to: