On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 09:15:12AM +0100, Adrin wrote: > This is the find output: > # find /etc -name '*vpnagentd_init*' > /etc/rc5.d/K25vpnagentd_init > /etc/rc5.d/S85vpnagentd_init > /etc/init.d/vpnagentd_init > /etc/rc4.d/K25vpnagentd_init > /etc/rc4.d/S85vpnagentd_init > /etc/rc2.d/K25vpnagentd_init > /etc/rc2.d/S85vpnagentd_init > /etc/rc3.d/K25vpnagentd_init > /etc/rc3.d/S85vpnagentd_init
OK, I've solved the problem. If you adjust your symlinks like this: (sid)root@hufflepuff:/# find /etc -name '*vpnagentd_init' | sort | xargs ls -l -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1153 Dec 4 08:46 /etc/init.d/vpnagentd_init lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Dec 14 22:52 /etc/rc0.d/K01vpnagentd_init -> ../init.d/vpnagentd_init lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Dec 14 22:52 /etc/rc1.d/K01vpnagentd_init -> ../init.d/vpnagentd_init lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 Dec 4 08:46 /etc/rc2.d/S21vpnagentd_init -> /etc/init.d/vpnagentd_init lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 Dec 4 08:46 /etc/rc3.d/S21vpnagentd_init -> /etc/init.d/vpnagentd_init lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 Dec 4 08:46 /etc/rc4.d/S21vpnagentd_init -> /etc/init.d/vpnagentd_init lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 Dec 4 08:46 /etc/rc5.d/S21vpnagentd_init -> /etc/init.d/vpnagentd_init lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Dec 14 22:52 /etc/rc6.d/K01vpnagentd_init -> ../init.d/vpnagentd_init And then run insserv: (sid)root@hufflepuff:/# insserv insserv: warning: script 'K01vpnagentd_init' missing LSB tags and overrides insserv: warning: script 'vpnagentd_init' missing LSB tags and overrides It will then adjust the links and all will be well. Not entirely sure why this shows two warnings though. I think the cryptic errors you were getting were a result of "S85" being higher than the biggest runlevel "S21" in used by insserv. This then makes it get placed after $all and hence the dependency loop. That's my theory anyway--I haven't looked at the code yet. The stop number is adjusted to be first, and has also been removed from runlevels 2-5 and added to runlevels 0, 1 and 6. However, it does look like there's room for improvement here. If we haven't got an LSB header, why does the number get used at all? Isn't its presence in this runlevel sufficient? If so, we could just ignore the number and have insserv assign it one appropriately. Likewise for stop links. I hope this makes some degree of sense. I'm still not entirely sure about how the internals work here. I didn't notice issues like this testing upgrades, possibly due to there always being a script at S99. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools `- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
