[steve.langasek at canonical.com: Re: hardy init script status action]

Steve Langasek steve.langasek at ubuntu.com
Mon Mar 17 22:56:25 GMT 2008

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 04:39:35PM +0000, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > The Linux Standard Base init script specification [1] describes the
> > status action in detail, and requires it for LSB compliance.  In brief,
> > it provides a centralized and direct way of determine if a given service
> > is running or not, with a bit more sophistication than grepping a
> > process listing.  It logs a message to standard out, and exits with one
> > of a number of meaningful codes, also defined in [1].

> > The risk should be minimal.  It will clearly not affect the
> > functionality of starting and stopping daemons.  And there should be no
> > chance of regression, as we're talking about adding a "status" handler
> > where this functionality did not exist before.

> There is always a chance of regression when modifying scripts which are
> critical for proper system functionality; for example, a typo in
> /lib/lsb/init-functions would be a very bad scene.

> Be sure that each script is thoroughly tested after being extended in this
> way.

> > We will work through the appropriate channels for filing Launchpad bugs,
> > submitting debdiffs, and requesting Feature Freeze exceptions.  As minor
> > as these code changes are, it would affect several packages, and we're
> > mentioning it here in the interest of gathering any meaningful comments
> > on the matter as soon as possible.

> How many scripts do you plan to touch?  This could involve quite a few
> freeze exceptions, which, although low-risk, always require some additional
> effort on the part of the release managers, etc.

What is the motivation for making this change during feature freeze?  I'm
not aware of any policy that requires Ubuntu init scripts to conform to the
current LSB init script specification?

The LSB is a standard which specifies two things: what LSB implementors must
provide in order to be an LSB-conformant runtime environment, and what ISVs
must do in order for their applications to be LSB-conformant applications.
As explicitly stated at the top of
the LSB init script requirements apply to LSB *applications*, not LSB
runtimes; Ubuntu packages are not, and never will be, LSB-conformant
applications (the requirements for which include that the packages be in RPM
format, and not use any library symbols beyond those specified in the LSB),
so this section is not relevant to Ubuntu's LSB conformance.

So for distributions, the LSB init script standard is as good a starting
point as any if you don't have any other policy for init scripts, but adding
LSB arguments to init scripts is not per se suitable for a feature freeze.

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/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list