On Mon, Aug 16, 2004 at 01:45:18PM +0200, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote: > > On 2004.08.15 19:06, dean gaudet wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Aug 2004, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote: > > > > > I'd say that's a bug in xdm, it should be at S95 or so. > > > > there are other S99 scripts as well... on my systems i find: > > > > S99fetchmail > > S99rmnologin > > S99stop-bootlogd > > S99xdm > > > > it's really only by luck that S99stop-bootlogd is almost last. that's why > > i suggested fixing bootlogd rather than trying to discover all the other > > S99s and change them. > > But that is what should be done. Policy says that if you use non-standard > start/stop levels, you have to discuss that with the sysvinit maintainer. > Nobody appears to do that. Bootlogd is part of sysvinit, so it's start/stop > level has been discussed with the maintainer, so it is correct. All the > others are incorrect. I asked you *months* ago what sequence number you thought xdm should use, and I got no reply. Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:17:26 -0500 From: Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> To: sysvinit@packages.debian.org, control@bugs.debian.org Cc: 226048@bugs.debian.org Subject: Re: Processed: Re: Bug#226048: sysvinit: S99stop-bootlogd should be the very last rc2.d entry Message-ID: <20040107011726.GU23545@deadbeast.net> -- G. Branden Robinson | Reality is what refuses to go away Debian GNU/Linux | when I stop believing in it. branden@debian.org | -- Philip K. Dick http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature