On 05/13/2012 01:16 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> DJ Lucas wrote:
>> On 05/13/2012 11:33 AM, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>>> xinglp wrote:
Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock .
When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed
for depended.
>>> Is ther
2012/5/14 Bryan Kadzban :
> xinglp wrote:
>> Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock .
>>
>> When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed
>> for depended.
>
> Is there a way in these newfangled headers to say that setclock is
> really an alias for udev? That
DJ Lucas wrote:
> On 05/13/2012 11:33 AM, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>> xinglp wrote:
>>> Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock .
>>>
>>> When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed
>>> for depended.
>> Is there a way in these newfangled headers to say that setc
On 05/13/2012 11:33 AM, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> xinglp wrote:
>> Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock .
>>
>> When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed
>> for depended.
> Is there a way in these newfangled headers to say that setclock is
> really an alia
xinglp wrote:
> Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock .
>
> When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed
> for depended.
Is there a way in these newfangled headers to say that setclock is
really an alias for udev? That's what's happening in the scripts,
Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock .
When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed
for depended.
And I THINK , ntpd and checkfs should not depend on $time.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq
