[Bug 1273462] Re: Users can mistakenly run init.d scripts and cause problems if an equivalent upstart job already exists

[Martin Pitt]

I still disagree that it's "undefined behaviour" -- if we have used the
actual init.d script so far to start e. g. mysql under upstart, then
this does not sound either racy nor undefined; it surely isn't what we
*intended* to do, though?

My concern is, this fix will change behaviour for *all* packages
shipping upstart jobs and sysvinit scripts, and it is not a given that
the two do equivalent things. So if we now call
/etc/init/frobnicator.conf instead of /etc/init.d/frobnicator and the
former has a bug or a changed behaviour, that would be a regression?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1273462

Title:
  Users can mistakenly run init.d scripts and cause problems if an
  equivalent upstart job already exists

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lsb/+bug/1273462/+subscriptions