Re: Question about Facility names
On Wed, Nov 22, Alan Cox wrote:
> > http://www.atnf.csiro.au/~rgooch/linux/boot-scripts/
> >
> > Alternatively (and probably the better solution), if we think some
> > people will want to stay with System V init scripts, we can modify the
> > proposal to make it more simpleinit friendly, while still allowing a
> > mapper to map things to the old System V numbers for those people who
> > want to stick with the old System V way of doing things.
>
> Well this certainly seems better than the existing proposal. It isnt clear
> what the system does when a 'needs' cannot be satisfied or there is a
> dependancy loop. The algorithm is simple enough and it will know when a loop
> occurs but possibly not how to cure it
I don't think so, I think it is terrible. You mix script commands and
meta information. So you need to read the whole file for dependencies. With
the existing proposal you have all information in one place which is easy to
maintain. And you have a strict separation of script commands and meta
information.
Thorsten
--
Thorsten Kukuk http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/ kukuk@suse.de
SuSE GmbH Schanzaeckerstr. 10 90443 Nuernberg
Linux is like a Vorlon. It is incredibly powerful, gives terse,
cryptic answers and has a lot of things going on in the background.
Reply to: