> Gooping up poor innocent init.d scripts, and confusing our poor
> innocent users, is a Bad Idea(tm). A separate set of scripts in a
> separate directory, or possibly a list managed with some simple perl
> tools, is much cleaner, and much less confusing.
You call 3 extra lines (one if you write it right) "gooping"?!
> > check=$(/etc/init.d/service nss-check 2>&1 || true)
> >
> > if [ "$check" = "restart" ]; then
> > # this service needs to be restarted
> > ...
> > fi
>
>
> This (obviously intended to be in a loop) could be replaced with:
>
> run-parts /etc/nss-restart
>
> Then each affected package could have a file in /etc/nss-restart along
> the lines of:
>
> set $(runlevel) # $2 is now current runlevel
> name=service
> rcfile=/etc/rc$2.d/S??$name
>
> test -f $rcfile && $rcfile restart
>
> Simple, cleaner, more elegant, more obvious, less confusing.
> Refinements, comments, and criticisms are welcome, but I think this is
> a far superior approach.
So forcing them to add a complete script to a directory is less complex
than adding a few lines to an already existing script? Having a directory
with all these little scripts and people asking "What is /etc/nss-restart
for?" is better for the users? IMO, your proposal is no different, no
better and no simpler. Adding:
nss-check) echo restart; exit 0;;
is not "gooping" nor is it a major confusion starter. It is one freaking
line.
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
