On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 06:39:57PM +0200, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:52:23AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:44:53AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >>The numbers specified for update-rc.d must be well ordered
> >>according to the dependencies spe
On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 10:58:09PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 27.06.2012 11:13, Roger Leigh wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to suggest that we do the following in sysv-rc update-rc.d:
> > - wheezy: silently drop start|stop sequence numbers and runlevels
> > (this is already the case when using ins
On 01.07.2012 22:58, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 27.06.2012 11:13, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> - wheezy+2: remove support for the options and error out if used
>
> error out in dh_install or update-rc.d?
^
dh_installinit
> It is seriously annoying making up random sequence
On 27.06.2012 11:13, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
> I'd like to suggest that we do the following in sysv-rc update-rc.d:
> - wheezy: silently drop start|stop sequence numbers and runlevels
> (this is already the case when using insserv, and we can remove the
> non-insserv codepaths)
> - wheezy+1: warn
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:52:23AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:44:53AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
The numbers specified for update-rc.d must be well ordered according
to the dependencies specified in the LSB headers. That means that that
update-rc.d could keep a
tags 539591 + patch
thanks
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 02:40:18PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 08:02:33AM +0200, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Roger Leigh wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:39:38PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > > > On 06/27/2012 03:4
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 08:02:33AM +0200, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:39:38PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > > On 06/27/2012 03:46 PM, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Wed,
On Jun 28, Roger Leigh wrote:
> While we could expend the time and effort to do this, I do have to
> question why. What would be the point of this? No one is using
> those numbers, so why retain them?
Agreed.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:44:53AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
>
> > This means that the runlevels and sequence numbers passed as
> > arguments to update-rc.d will never be used; they will just get
> > silently discarded. The main problem as I see it is that these
>
Roger Leigh writes:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'd just like to briefly discuss potential plans for update-rc.d
> in wheezy+1, and how this might impact on file-rc and sysv-rc.
>
> sysv-rc has defaulted to using LSB header dependencies and insserv
> for a few years now. The last few releases require you to
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:39:38PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > On 06/27/2012 03:46 PM, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Paul Wise wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Yes. See
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:39:38PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 06/27/2012 03:46 PM, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Paul Wise wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes. See http://bugs.debian.org/539591 >,
> >>> http://bugs.debi
On 06/27/2012 03:46 PM, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Paul Wise wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>>
>>> Yes. See http://bugs.debian.org/539591 >,
>>> http://bugs.debian.org/573004 > and the source of insserv, where
>>> a patch to do this was c
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> > Yes. See http://bugs.debian.org/539591 >,
> > http://bugs.debian.org/573004 > and the source of insserv, where
> > a patch to do this was created and included by Kel. The patch has
> > been
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Yes. See http://bugs.debian.org/539591 >,
> http://bugs.debian.org/573004 > and the source of insserv, where
> a patch to do this was created and included by Kel. The patch has
> been available for more than two years.
Hmm, no upload
[Roger Leigh]
> Could [file-rc] use insserv to do the dependency graph and then just
> consume the makefile-style dependency list?
Yes. See http://bugs.debian.org/539591 >,
http://bugs.debian.org/573004 > and the source of insserv, where
a patch to do this was created and included by Kel. The pa
Hi folks,
I'd just like to briefly discuss potential plans for update-rc.d
in wheezy+1, and how this might impact on file-rc and sysv-rc.
sysv-rc has defaulted to using LSB header dependencies and insserv
for a few years now. The last few releases require you to enable
insserv to upgrade, and th
17 matches
Mail list logo
