On Fri, 06 Jan 2006, sean finney wrote: > fail with a non-zero value (lsb-compliant packages, i believe), sometimes > it will exit normally without performing any action (apache 1.x for > example), and in other cases it will start the inactive service (apache 2.x, > for example).
Please file bugs, severity serious. These packages are broken if they are doing what you describe. In fact, restarting an inactive service on reload is so utterly broken it ain't funny. > my take on this is that, while optional, the reload target must not > stop and start a service if implemented in an init script. it would Correct. That's why many services do _not_ implement reload (because they don't support the functionality, really). And if you don't implement it, you bang out with an error so that whomever called knows you didn't grok what they told you to do in the initscript. > then logically follow that reload must not start a service which is > not running. Also correct. Force-reload is muddy waters, and it will often restart services (truth to be told, it shouldn't but I doubt it will be fixed), but anything restarting or starting services on reload is buggy, and non-compliant to Debian policy. > is my interpretation of this correct, or am i over-analyzing things? It is correct, AFAIK. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
