New ZeroConf Spec

[Matthew Palmer]

On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 03:03:20PM +0800, Trent Lloyd wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 08:43:02AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 02:48:22PM +0800, Trent Lloyd wrote:
> > > I noticed update-rc.d didnt' seem to have any idea what they were to
> > > start to (run order etc)
> > 
> > Yep, update-rc.d doesn't have any knowledge of that, nor is it intended to
> > -- it's sole purpose in life is to run in a maintainer script and set the
> > maintainer's idea of default run levels.  Do one job and do it well, and all
> > that.
> 
> Which begs the question is there a tool that does know?

The maintainer script is the only place that this is recorded.  RedHat
(maybe it's LSB, but I don't think so) has specially-formatted crud in the
script header to tell tools where to put init scripts in the order, but the
problem there is that it doesn't take into account any local tuning of the
order to accomodate local scripts or otherwise -- chkconfig (hack, spit!)
will blat all over your local modifications, while update-rc.d won't touch
it (because there's already symlinks in place) and sysv-rc-conf, whilst not
optimal (in that it doesn't reverse the numbering on K), will at least
preserve your numbering instead of eating it.

I suppose there is *something* to be said for dependency-based init script
systems, after all... <grin>

- Matt