"Derek D. Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At some point hitherto, Kevin D. Clark hath spake thusly:
> > Well if ypxfrd should start after ypserv (I'm going by your quote
> > above), then I would recommend that you rename S26ypxfrd to S27ypxfrd,
> > since typically init executes scripts in /etc/rc.d/*/ with the same
> > "number" in a "deterministic but unspecified" order.
>
> That isn't quite true. The order is specified.
"Deterministic but unspecified" is a direct quote from my Solaris
box's man page. Since Solaris is very SYSV-flavored, and since only
documentation I've seen on Linux's init is that it tries to be
compatable with the SYSV init scripts (I have not seen a definitive
statement that clearly states what should happen in this case), I
myself will always assume that Linux's init executes these scripts in
a "deterministic but unspecified" order.
You can make assumptions about the order if you want. However, I
wouldn't recommend doing this if you want your scripts to be
portable. Also, in the absence of a formally documented behavior in
this case, future Linux systems could implement a different behavior,
and then your scripts would die silently, which I assume could cause
you to have a Very Bad Day.
Regards,
--kevin
--
1.3: If I write the code int i, j; can I assume that (&i + 1) == &j?
Only sometimes. It's not portable, because in EBCDIC, i and j are
not adjacent.
-- from "Infrequently Asked Questions in comp.lang.c"
*****************************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body.
*****************************************************************
