Re: Parallel booting enabled by default

2010-05-24 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 09:42:42PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: [Kurt Roeckx] And they should probably also be removed from /etc/rc1.d/ in that case because it also uses sendsigs. Lintian warns about this as far as I know. Perhaps. I am not quite sure how that will interact with

Re: Parallel booting enabled by default

2010-05-24 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
[Kurt Roeckx] I don't see why you think that would be a problem. Either the init script in runlevel 1 is going to stop the service, or it gets killed. And going back to runlevel 2 should start the same services as started otherwise in that runlevel. The reason is that I remember some bugs

Re: Parallel booting enabled by default

2010-05-24 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 02:58:54PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: [Kurt Roeckx] I don't see why you think that would be a problem. Either the init script in runlevel 1 is going to stop the service, or it gets killed. And going back to runlevel 2 should start the same services as

Re: Parallel booting enabled by default

2010-05-24 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
[Kurt Roeckx] I think we're discussing 2 things here, while I was only thinking about one of them: - Move scripts from rcS.d to rc[1-5].d - Removing rc[016].d/K* scripts Could be. As far as I know, the only daemon we currently start in rcS.d (that keeps running) is udev. There are more

Re: Parallel booting enabled by default

2010-05-21 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 02:05:26PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: * Shutdown speed can be improved by removing scripts which only kill their daemon from /etc/rc[06].d/ and leaving it to the sendsigs script to kill all of them at the same time instead. And they should probably also be

Re: Parallel booting enabled by default

2010-05-21 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
[Kurt Roeckx] And they should probably also be removed from /etc/rc1.d/ in that case because it also uses sendsigs. Lintian warns about this as far as I know. Perhaps. I am not quite sure how that will interact with runlevel switching to and from runlevel 1. I am sure it is safe for