On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 6:25 AM, shawn wilson <ag4ve...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 10, 2011 6:13 AM, "Tom H" <tomh0...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I've suggested the use of update-rc.d and invoke-rc.d here and on >> ubuntu-users and been told that they're not meant for users/sysadmins. >> I hope that your link (thanks; I'll check it out later today) explains >> why, because I've never seen any bad effects from their use. > > To all curious about these things, I suggest searching this list for > 'update-rc.d' or even Google that with 'site:' and look at the discussions > we've had in the past few months. Some people have made some very insightful > comments in these threads (IIRC ~3 good threads in the past 6 months).
Thanks. I think that we covered just about every aspect in a thread started by Camaleon in November or December last year. The only half-explanation that update-rc.d isn't meant for sysadmins that I've seen (somewhere) is that its syntax makes it more appropriate for scripts. >From what I remember from the "Camaleon thread" and what I've read today in the debian-devel posted earlier in thread, using update-rc.d's disable option seems to be a good way to disable a service, if you're prepared to use a tool apparently only meant for maintainers. Furthermore, there are some doubts about enable/disable, see [1]. So, unless this "unstability" has been dealt with, there are two possible strikes against "update-rc.d service-name disable". But, basically, there doesn't seem to be a canonical way for a sysadmin to disable a service. And that leaves changing a service's runlevels rather than disabling it; update-rc.d fails, even with "-f". [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=606505#12 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTik9t33ngJfTVWB1awwK=dnz36r...@mail.gmail.com
