Let me try to provide a few more details: On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 11:11 -0400, Renier Morales wrote:
> > o) Using "#!/bin/sh" instead of "#!/bin/bash" is better practice. This sounds great...we can make the change at the same time. > > o) This block comes from /etc/init.d/dhcp3-server on Debian. > > > > # Required-Start: $network > > # Required-Stop: $network > > # Should-Start: $local_fs > > # Should-Stop: $local_fs > > > > Does openhpid need $named and $remote_fs services? > > > > No, I'd say it doesn't need those. Everything else, inlcuding Anton's > suggestions look good. [...] > > > +### BEGIN INIT INFO > > > +# Provides: openhpid > > > +# Required-Start: $network $named $remote_fs $syslog > > > +# Required-Stop: $network $named $remote_fs $syslog > > > +# Default-Start: 2 3 4 5 > > > +# Default-Stop: 0 1 6 > > > +# Short-Description: Start OpenHPI daemon at boot time > > > +# Description: Enable OpenHPI service which is provided by > > > openhpid. > > > +### END INIT INFO The reference I used for the "Required-Start" and "Required-Stop" was: http://refspecs.freestandards.org/LSB_3.1.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/facilname.html For "$named", my reasoning was that some installations may want hostnames in openhpi.conf, and without $named, the daemon start-up for those would fail. I would suggest erring on the side of safety, because it can be quite hard for a user to figure out a problem such as this, when a daemon won't start while booting, but will start later when run by hand. An example of a plugin that can take a hostname is ipmidirect, when using the rmcp protocol. For "$remote_fs", the above description says that some LSB installations may have /usr as a remote filesystem. Since (I think) our libraries go under /usr in many installations, don't we need this so that the daemon can load the plugin shared library? For "$syslog", I think we use this facility to log daemon errors, so it would seem that it would have to be operational. The "Default-Start" and "Default-Stop", of course, were the point of the bug report, so that's what the user is asking that we add. Can anyone comment on whether the run levels I've proposed are appropriate for Red Hat and SuSE? Thanks for the feedback! -- Bryan Sutula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Openhpi-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel
