> ]] Roger Leigh > > > I'm not sure myself. Probably because it's potentially dangerous > > since it would want to replace it with a symlink, and that might > > result in dataloss. Do you have an example of the virtual > > facility problem? > > Why would it want to replace it with a symlink? AIUI, insserv just > renames the files in /etc/rcN.d ?
No insserv doesn't just rename files it removes/recreates symlinks as needed depending on change to the computed dependecy graph when adding/removing a node. The current behaviour is to ignore regular files which are installed to the symlink farm, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=493202#85 Having random regular files in amongst a symlink farm which is dynamically created dependning on service set installed is a recipe for mess and I cannot think of a clean way to handle the situation other than conveying a message that says "Don't do that please use update-rc.d to register your service and create start/stop links with optimised priority depending on your current service set" - but thats getting a bit wordy for a one line message ... > > For the latter, I seem to have: > > : tfheen@qurzaw /etc/init.d > grep Provides bootlog* > bootlogd:# Provides: bootlogd > bootlogs:# Provides: bootlogs > bootlogs.sh:# Provides: bootlogs > > which makes it complain about something already provided. One of those scripts (bootlogs/ bootlogs.sh) must be an orphan conffile ? > > > Both of these are insserv bugs rather than sysv-rc bugs, BTW, so > > reassigning. > > Sure. Not so sure. Thanks, Kel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
