Your message dated Fri, 11 Mar 2016 18:42:16 -0300 with message-id <caafdzj_-sx_hrwaqvkf3whn9tohki+qobzg2hjcni59xhwj...@mail.gmail.com> and subject line Re: update-rc.d service lsb-defaults has caused the Debian Bug report #584086, regarding update-rc.d: service lsb-defaults to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] immediately.) -- 584086: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=584086 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: sysv-rc Version: 2.88dsf-7 Severity: wishlist One day I saw update-rc.d: warning: cron stop runlevel arguments (0 1 6) do not match LSB Default-Stop values (1) So then I thought "wouldn't it be nice if there was a way, to make them match, simply". However, try as I might, # update-rc.d cron defaults update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing update-rc.d: warning: cron stop runlevel arguments (0 1 6) do not match LSB Default-Stop values (1) # update-rc.d -f cron remove update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing # update-rc.d cron defaults update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing update-rc.d: warning: cron stop runlevel arguments (0 1 6) do not match LSB Default-Stop values (1) there is just no lsb-defauts, only the defaults described on the man page at For legacy mode, the following section documents the old behaviour. So the new behaviour, which is not documented, as I mentioned in a sister bug, is actually the old behaviour. Or better yet, I hereby wish for a # update-rc.d service lsb-defaults command, that will use the defaults as found in the LSB headers.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:09:17 +0100 Jordi Pujol <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > also thinking that those warning messages are confusing, > because the package behaviour is allways use as defaults the LSB headers. The warning was removed in a release earlier than jessie. Saludos
--- End Message ---
