Hint: your mails are easier to read if you put a blank line between citations and your reply.
On 2009-09-06 21:47 +0200, David Baron wrote: > On Sunday 06 September 2009 21:23:10 debian-user-digest- > requ...@lists.debian.org wrote: >> > The upgrade from sid finds it unsafe to change to dependency based boot >> > and leaves it unconfigured with a couple of missing .rc files. >> >> What are .rc files? > Reinstalling over testing did not flag them again! That does not answer my question, I still do not know what ".rc files" are in the first place. > Interesting that the problems preventing the "migration" are: > 1. bittorent left obsolete init.d script I have no need for bittorent, > actually. > 2. jackd left behind and obsolete init.d script. I do not start jackd using > this script since many audio things do not work with it. I need to use jackd > manually. > 3. Mono-xsp left behind an obsolete init.d script. This is a standalone > asp.net knockoff--I can remove this as well since were I to use mono-xsp, I > would do so using apache. > 4. Package pcscd removed by not purged. I am purging it. > 5. Reniced removed by not purged. I use and instead of this one. Purge it. > 6. Timidity left behind and obsolete init.d script. > 7. Virtual Box 2.0 removed by not purge (OK, already, change "by" to "but")-- > Sun should fix this. Vbox upgrades do not replace the old one--one must > remove > it and then install the new one. Shame on them. Purging them. > 8. K20hddtemp missing LSB tags and overrides. The only one really relevant? > > Purging bittorrent and the othes leaves me with obsolete init.d scripts from > jackd and timidity. I want these packages but not necessarily the init.d > scripts to start them. (In fact, Timidity now has a separate daemon package.) > So how do I fix this. Remove the obsolete scripts by hand. > Then there is the k20hddtemp. You should upgrade the hddtemp package, the missing LSB info has been fixed in version 0.3-beta15-41. > I have had insserv around for a while but never used it because I was afraid > to end up with an unbootable system and no recourse. Since insserv warns that > one cannot turn back while debian maintainers say best to go ahead .... what > to do? The warning that the system may become unbootable is in fact greatly exaggerated, I have yet to see a bug report about that. Most problems with incorrect LSB headers are more subtle and only play a role under relatively obscure circumstances (like having /usr on NFS). Sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org