On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 11:58:17AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: > Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sat, 05 Jul 2008, Marc Haber wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 10:58:35AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > >> > THanks, I could come up with a transition plan myself if needed. But > >> > compare your suggestions with: "someone goes over all init scripts, file > >> > bugs and in lenny+1 we're done". > >> That'll cause tremendous pain for backporters. I'm opposed. > > You're opposed to what? Fixing non-policy compliant init script? > > I think you misunderstood. I don't want to change the default behaviour > > of start-stop-daemon and as such, there's no need for any transition. > Couldn't the default be changed once all init scripts have been fixed > up? No, because "fixed up" does not imply "switched to use --oknodo". It only means *checking* the return value of s-s-d and handling it in a policy-compliant manner; this is done for you if you use --oknodo, but you don't have to use --oknodo and it's not appropriate for dpkg to break scripts that don't use --oknodo but are policy compliant. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
