On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Marc Haber wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 10:37:05AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Marc Haber wrote: > > > On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:12:36 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, David Pashley wrote: > > > >> > The better fix IS to add an extra line to both incarnations of > > > >> > invoke-rc.d > > > >> > (sysv-rc's and file-rc's) to look under /usr/local/sbin first. > > > > > > > >Make that "later". I just noticed one has to run the system's > > > >/usr/sbin/policy-rc.d in preference to all else. > > > > > > Why? > > > > Because if any package that is NOT a policy-rc.d package is providing a > > policy-rc.d in /usr/sbin, it has a damn good reason to do so, and it should > > take precendence. Examples of damn good reasons are alternative initscript > > managers such as runit. > > Packages providing /usr/sbin/policy-rc.d are required to use the > alternatives system anyway.
Yes, but they can use diversions when the entire policy-rc.d system has to be disabled, if need be. However, if invoke-rc.d searches /usr/local/sbin/policy-rc.d first, this whole safety net is disabled. So invoke-rc.d could be changed to look under /usr/local/sbin/policy-rc.d as well, but only if it failed to find a runnable policy-rc.d at /usr/sbin/policy-rc.d. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
