On 14Oct16:1151-0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> It strikes me that there's actually very little that needs to be done. In
> the short term, the world, including Debian, will continue to support
> sysvinit scripts - if only because the BSDs aren't going anywhere, I expect
> autotools will continue t
Steve Litt wrote:
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 11:28:50 -0400
Steve Litt wrote:
POINT OF CLARIFICATION:
Nothing written below is nosh specific. It could be used with nosh, or
upstart, or sysvinit, or any other PID1 that's *only* a PID1. So how
about it, who wants to join me in neutering systemd on Deb
bably every other distro?
> With everything I've learned during the systemd fiasco, if I were to
> choose Debian's sysv-init, it would be nosh or something very much
> like it. And, as far as I know, it's ready to go, and our only
> involvement would be building rep
already exists:
> >
> > http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/sysvinit
> >
> > That would be a far better place to get involved.
>
> Would that be debian's sysv-init?
With everything I've learned during the systemd fiasco, if I were to
choose Debian's sysv-i
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * On 2014 16 Oct 07:54 -0500, Joel Rees wrote:
>> Would that be debian's sysv-init?
>
> That link is from the sysvinit-core package's description in Sid's
> Aptitude. Presumably it is the upstream pro
* On 2014 16 Oct 07:54 -0500, Joel Rees wrote:
> Would that be debian's sysv-init?
That link is from the sysvinit-core package's description in Sid's
Aptitude. Presumably it is the upstream project.
- Nate
--
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of al
et enough mass to get a
>> project started and get it (mostly) off-list.
>
> Perhaps you are not aware of the development project for sysvinit that
> already exists:
>
> http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/sysvinit
>
> That would be a far better place to get involved.
Would t
* On 2014 15 Oct 19:39 -0500, Joel Rees wrote:
> systemd's problems would best be discussed at the systemd project. (Modulo
> the willingness of the devs over there to discuss them.)
>
> What I'm thinking is to talk about specific features to enable the sort of
> "managing services" that systemd s
systemd's problems would best be discussed at the systemd project. (Modulo
the willingness of the devs over there to discuss them.)
What I'm thinking is to talk about specific features to enable the sort of
"managing services" that systemd seems to be aimed at, and how to implement
them, where exi
symbolic links to operate properly (for being started and stopped
anyway). I'm not positive about that though. Does someone wanna elaborate
on this
Leonard Leblanc
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 4:
Hi,
The scripts are stored in /etc/init.d
Each runlevel has its own directory e.g. /etc/rc0.d, /etc/rc1.d etc. In
the runlevel dirs there are a load of symlinks to the scripts in
/etc/init.d. The format of the filename is:
Sxx to run a script with the start argument when
entering the
On 03-Feb-2001 Stephen Robertson wrote:
> I'm fairly new to Debian and still learning the system. What is the
> accepted method of configuring which services are stopped and started in
>
> each run level, and how can I add my own commands to the Init scripts.
> RedHat provided a file called rc.l
I'm fairly new to Debian and still learning the system. What is the
accepted method of configuring which services are stopped and started in
each run level, and how can I add my own commands to the Init scripts.
RedHat provided a file called rc.local for adding user commands. Is
there a similar
ckage file for runlevel.conf and you will find it.
>
> Why is file-rc not the default, just out of curiosity. I found it
> much more intuitive, and a bit easier and faster to maintain. The
> default sysV init scripts took me a bit longer to figure out.
Well...it is not the "tr
Quoting the lone gunman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Why is file-rc not the default, just out of curiosity. I found it
> much more intuitive, and a bit easier and faster to maintain. The
> default sysV init scripts took me a bit longer to figure out.
First, the sysV mechanism is more co
it
much more intuitive, and a bit easier and faster to maintain. The
default sysV init scripts took me a bit longer to figure out.
I would install file-rc agian, but I have a worry. I noticed when
updating/installing new packages with file-rc installed, I get a *LOT*
of errors that are someth
16 matches
Mail list logo
