Am 01.12.18 um 23:04 schrieb Michael Biebl: > Am 01.12.18 um 23:00 schrieb Michael Biebl: >> I'm still convinced, that fixing this properly in init-d-script would be >> the much better solution. If init-d-script was implemented in C, it >> could be used as a shebang/interpreter on non-Linux and it would be >> possible to have $0 be set properly. Which also means, no changes to >> 40-systemd would be necessary. >> >> Now we have the unfortunate situation, that implementation details like >> __init_d_script_name leak into 40-systemd (or the init-d-script name in >> your second commit), and I do not like that at all. >> >> Also, keep in mind, that 40-systemd might not be the only script which >> relies on $0 being set properly. E.g. pidofproc in >> /lib/lsb/init-functions uses $0. So I can only hope, that no init script >> based on init-d-script ever uses pidofproc or $0 directly. > > Btw, so far no (convincing) reason was presented why this is not fixed > in init-d-script directly. > > Would be interested to know, why the sysvinit maintainers came to this > conclusion. >
I'd also be interested to know why #!/usr/bin/env /lib/init/init-d-script is preferred over #!/bin/sh /lib/init/init-d-script given that init-d-script is *no* C implementation. Regards, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
