On Tuesday 02 December 2008, Andrei Popescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote about 'Re: Debian Project News - December 2nd, 2008': >On Tue,02.Dec.08, 12:34:27, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: >> The linked mail makes reference to the "insserv" package. Is that >> package required to get a dependency-based boot sequence? Is that >> package sufficent to get a dependency-base boot sequence? >> >> I ask because I'd like to start testing it on both my desktop (Lenny) >> and laptop >> (Etch[Base]/Etch-Backports/Lenny[Mostly]/Sid/Experimental[1]). > >I wouldn't recommend trying it on anything earlier than Lenny, some of >the necessary info in the initscripts may be missing. OTOH I think >insserv will warn about this.
If I run into any such warnings, I can "just" upgrade the package to Lenny, which is fine. If that fails to fix the problem, I know where the BTS receives mail. >Additionally you might want to try using dash as /bin/sh >(dpkg-reconfigure dash). Actually, I've been doing that for.. a while. I never got bit by any of the bashism bugs. In any case, that was something I knew I could handle fixing is I *did* run into a bug. I'm not as comfortable with dependency-based init systems, but if the devs are calling it done I'm willing to try it out. I'm assuming the answer to both of the questions is "yes"? (Two *useful* replies, but no definitive answers.) -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
