On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 05:12:24PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > --- a/policy.sgml > > +++ b/policy.sgml > > @@ -7188,6 +7188,74 @@ Reloading <var>description</var> > > configuration...done. > [...] > > + <p> > > + Because packages shipping upstart jobs may be installed on > > + systems that are not using upstart, maintainer scripts must > > + still use the common <prgn>update-rc.d</prgn> and > > + <prgn>invoke-rc.d</prgn> interfaces for configuring runlevels > > + and for starting and stopping services. These maintainer > > + scripts must not call the <prgn>start</prgn>, > > + <prgn>restart</prgn>, <prgn>reload</prgn>, or <prgn>stop</prgn> > > + commands directly.
> When I first read this, I wondered if in a postinst containing > # Automatically added by dh_installinit > if [ -x "/etc/init.d/vsftpd" ]; then > update-rc.d vsftpd start 20 2 3 4 5 . stop 80 1 . >/dev/null > invoke-rc.d vsftpd start || exit $? > fi > # End automatically added section > the "invoke-rc.d vsftpd start" line should be removed when I add an upstart > job. Possible cause: the word "directly" is being asked to do too much. > Would the following be too strict? > Maintainer scripts should not execute /etc/init.d/<package> scripts > directly. I think you've misunderstood the intent here. When upstart is installed, it provides *commands* called "start", "restart", "reload", and "stop" in /sbin. These are the commands that must not be called from maintainer scripts. It has nothing to do with invocation of /etc/init.d/<package> scripts, which is already prohibited elsewhere in policy. Is there a word that you think would be less ambiguous than "command" for expressing this? -- 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/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
