Hi Petter On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 03:59, Petter Reinholdtsen <p...@hungry.com> wrote:
> Well, it has been an underlying assumtion on the implementation of > /etc/init.d/rc and its optimization. The fact that zleds is executed > at all is pure luck. If the optimization had been implemented > slightly differently, it would not. But if one does not use the optimization (I presume in this case, we're talking about insserv), then we don't have a problem. > What about splitting it in two instead, one to run early, and one to > run late? Will it work. The scripts would run in this way, but not at the right time. The scripts would be very simple, essentially, manually call zleds start in one script and zleds stop in the other. However, this solution does not solve the problem that we would like the scripts called specifically at the beginning and end of the runlevel. This desire is derived from the the purpose of the script which is to let the user know when the runlevel is entered and exited. It seems that insserv with the LSB headers do have the capability to run the script as the first and last script within a particular runlevel, or is there a way to do implement this? > I believe it is a bad idea to base nslu2-utils on undefined behaviour, > and would recommend finding a way that did not have the same script > run both stop and start symlinks in the same runlevel. In the short term (i.e. Lenny), it seems that we need to find a solution to that works for the init system that Debian uses as part of the standard system installation. For Lenny, the init scripts that nslu2-utils currently provides do work in a standard system because insserv is not installed as part of the base system. In addition, the NSLU2 is almost exclusively used as a server, so boot time is not really an issue, so I doubt that many people are going to be tempted to install insserv. If they do, the NSLU2 will still boot, but the LEDs will be screwed up. However, this is something that we can warn users about. Therefore, I can't really see a good reason to change the scripts (except to add a default LSB header) for Lenny. For future releases, Debian may use insserv by default, or upstart (which seems to have been adopted by Fedora, and is obviously used in Ubuntu), or something else. When that happens, I think that we can revisit this problem. I'm not sure it makes sense to put a lot of work into finding a solution until the new init system becomes the standard. Does this sound reasonable? Gordon -- Gordon Farquharson GnuPG Key ID: 32D6D676 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
