tag 226048 + moreinfo thanks On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 05:33:20AM -0600, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > Processing commands for control@bugs.debian.org: > > > retitle 226048 xdm: start at S99 is too late > Bug#226048: sysvinit: S99stop-bootlogd should be the very last rc2.d entry > Changed Bug title. > > > reassign 226048 xdm > Bug#226048: xdm: start at S99 is too late > Bug reassigned from package `sysvinit' to `xdm'. > > > thanks > Stopping processing here. It's polite to CC the package maintainer when using the control bot to reassign bugs. That way he doesn't have to check the BTS to see why you reassigned it. I'll quote by hand: > Well, no, I think S99xdm is wrongly named. Nothing should be > run at S99 really. It doesn't leave room to run anything > after it, which for xdm makes no sense, potentially (as has > been proven now) there is stuff that needs to be run after it. > > Debian policy also says that if people use non-standard sequence > numbers with update-rc.d (as xdm does) they should contact > the sysvinit maintainer for coordination first. That has > never happened. > > Reassigning bug to xdm. Should I interpret this as pre-emptive denial of a request to let xdm use sequence number 99? If so, can you please suggest a sequence number I should use? -- G. Branden Robinson | You are not angry with people when Debian GNU/Linux | you laugh at them. Humor teaches branden@debian.org | them tolerance. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- W. Somerset Maugham
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature