Exactly. It is more of a special case to *not* want a server to start at boot rather than the other way around. To those who think that apt-get install apache is too easy, then why is apt-get remove apache too hard?
-Rob On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 04:00:43PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Steven Barker wrote: > > > I think that there should be a way to install a debian server packages > > without having the installation scripts start the server. This need not be > > default, but it should be possible. > > Why should anyone want to install a server without letting it run? > > > The standard-config is normally sane, and when you do not think so, place > another config-file there before installing it. ( If you are that paranoic > you should not only do ar -x xxx.deb ; tar -xzf data.tgz etc/configfile , > but also check the whole package before installing it). > > > > would download, install and configure apache, but not run it. When the > > sysadmin was satisfied with the configureation files, etc, then update-rc.d > > and such could be run by hand (or by another call to apt-get/dpkg with > > another flag). > > Not adding rc.d-Links is really ridicilous. If you have an computer, that > justs boots after installing without the chance to change links, than you > should plug-out the network-cable so or so. > > > This would have to be both a policy change and a technical change in apt > > and/or dpkg. I think it would be a good compromise between security and the > > simplicity of apt-get install foo. > > I do not see a nesecarity for it. Though if you want to supply patches to > carry an --no-run in dpkg to some environment-variable to the script and > and patch to dh_xxx to check this, go ahead, but there are important and > senseful thing to do. > > Hochachtungsvoll, > Bernhard R. Link > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
