[Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe] > Btw... I personally believe that sysfsutils should start somewhere > close to procps since both do a similar job. The latter currently > starts in rcS, which IMHO makes sense because it eases the > dependencies of daemons enormously. Would you mind moving sysfsutils > to rcS if I'm getting the cpufrequtils maintainer convinced to move > to rcS, too?
Note that I strongly recommend as many scripts as possible are moved _out_ of rcS.d/, to make the early boot easier to fix when it comes to kernel events, make single user mode more useful and to increase the amount of concurrency possible during boot. So I would recommend to first see if procps can be moved out of rcS.d/ first, and not start by looking at how more scripts can be put in rcS.d/. :) For the issue reported, adding a header 'should-start: cpufrequtils' to sysfsutils will make sure it is always started after cpufrequtils, if both packages are installed. Let me know if you need a patch proposal. Happy hacking, -- Petter Reinholdtsen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
