On 7/30/08, Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Martin-Éric Racine]
> > Was this issue ever documented? If yes, let's close the bug.
>
>
> Where should this issue be documented?
Somewhere in a README, there should be the same explanation you
provided about why some packages will ca
[Martin-Éric Racine]
> Hello Petter,
Hi.
> Was this issue ever documented? If yes, let's close the bug.
Where should this issue be documented? The only stuff that could be
said to solve it is on the wiki. Is that sufficient? Check
http://wiki.debian.org/LSBInitScripts/DependencyBasedBoot>?
Hello Petter,
Was this issue ever documented? If yes, let's close the bug.
Cheers!
--
Martin-Éric Racine
http://q-funk.iki.fi
title 463574 insserv: Document why obsolete init.d scripts will block
dependency based boot sequencing
thanks
[Martin-Éric Racine]
> OK. That makes sense, now that you mention it. Is this documented
> anywhere? If yes, then we can close this bug.
I guess I should documenting it in the readme. W
On 2/1/08, Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Martin-Éric Racine]
> > I disagree with the above conclusion that the bug is with
> > the packages, since they include proper headers. As to the
> > assumption that the files are obsolete, again, the packages
> > provide them for a good r
[Martin-Éric Racine]
> I disagree with the above conclusion that the bug is with
> the packages, since they include proper headers. As to the
> assumption that the files are obsolete, again, the packages
> provide them for a good reason so, no, they are not obsolete.
You can disagree all you want
Package: insserv
Version: 1.10.0-6
Severity: normal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
info: Checking if it is safe to convert to dependency based boot.
error: Obsolete conffile /etc/init.d/makedev left behind by package makedev
error: Obsolete conffile /etc/init.d/sudo left behind by
7 matches
Mail list logo
