On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 04:38:26PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "The package maintainer scripts must use invoke-rc.d to invoke the > > /etc/init.d/* initscripts, instead of calling them directly." > > Then, but, it say: > > "Most packages will simply need to change: > > /etc/init.d/<package> > > <action> > > in their postinst and prerm scripts to: > > if which invoke-rc.d >/dev/null 2>&1; then > > invoke-rc.d package <action> > > else > > /etc/init.d/package <action> > > fi > > " > > ... which is fallback to using /etc/init.d directly if 'invoke-rc.d' is > > missing. But, how it can be? The package 'sysv-rc' that contains > > 'invoke-rc.d' has 'required' priority. > Required priority doesn't mean that you can assume the package is always > there. You still have to declare explicit dependencies or fall back if > it's not unless the package is marked essential, which sysv-rc is not. sysvinit is: Package: sysvinit Essential: yes Pre-Depends: [...] sysv-rc (>= 2.86.ds1-1.2) | file-rc (>> 0.7.0), [...] And both sysv-rc and file-rc provide invoke-rc.d. Since sysv-rc was split out of the sysvinit specifically to allow the alternative with file-rc, I think it's still intended that invoke-rc.d be regarded as an Essential interface? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
