Raphael Geissert <[email protected]> writes: > Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Init scripts are not randomly run before /usr is mounted. > > Unless they have a broken or incorrect LSB header (which... happens, and > hence my urgency on implementing the other check), or they play with the > default order values (not that often). Yeah, I'd be more comfortable keeping it if we suppressed it if the init script declared a dependency on the appropriate fs thing and it was using Perl. I agree with the idea for anything that isn't essential (because of the removal of dependencies problem) -- that *is* a Policy violation, since Policy says that init scripts must cope with still being installed when the package has been removed. If we exclude Perl and anything else that's essential, I think it might even be serious as you had it originally, the more I think about it, since scripts cannot deal with their interpreter missing. > The init.d-related checks I still plant to write are: > * init.d-script-is-foo.sh-but-not-bin-sh > Basically making sure *.sh scripts use /bin/sh. This would have been of more > use when Policy still stated that script might be sourced. > Maybe with a severity/certainty of minor/certain? My instinct says minor/certain with a willingness to downgrade to wishlist or pedantic if anyone complains. There are enough reasons why writing an init script in something other than sh are a bad idea that I'd like to try it as a warning. > * init.d-uses-usr-binary-but-no-dependency-on-remote_fs > serious/certain? What we're going to run into with this is that in practice /usr is almost always mounted, which makes me wonder if this is RC. But supporting NFS-mounted /usr is something that Debian tries to do, so maybe it is. It's either serious or important, at least. I'm not sure we're going to get enough accuracy on the file scan to be able to say we're certain, though. I'm thinking of init scripts that have optional actions that aren't one of the ones run during the build, possibly implemented with shell functions. > * default-file-contains-not-only-variables-and-comments > A check for anything that doesn't match: > m/^\s*(?:#|[A-Za-z0-9_]+=|$)/ > serious/certain? Huh, I didn't even know that was in Policy. But there it is, so yes. (I suspect that will prompt a call to change Policy, but we can deal with that when it happens.) -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
