Petter Reinholdtsen <p...@hungry.com> writes: > [Simon Josefsson] >> The patch looks trivially correct to me, so I have applied it. > > Good. Please review the dependencies too, to verify that all the > scripts/service it should start after / stop before are listed as > dependencies. I do not know the package well enough to know if there > are something missing. :)
I can't think of any other dependencies. The daemon needs the binary itself (i.e., /usr); /var file system; syslog; and network to be up, but I might have forgotten something. Is there a common list of typical dependencies somewhere? I recall that the LSB section was written for RedHat, which use slightly different semantics (i.e., they support /usr on a remote file system, or at least did at some point). >> Is it worth an upload to fix this? > > I believe so. Everyone installing this package when dependency based > boot sequencing get the init.d scripts inserted into the wrong rc?.d/ > directories, and at the moment dependency based boot sequencing is the > default in Debian/unstabe. Ouch. I'll do an upload soon. >> I'm not sure what the best practice is. > > The best practice is not very good, but it is to remove all rc?.d/ > symlinks during upgrade and reinsert the script symlinks to make sure > the change take effect. This is because of limitations in the > update-rc.d interface. :( Hm. Are you saying just uploading the package with your patch won't be sufficient? Any pointers to other packages with similar problem, and how it was fixed? /Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
