On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 1:00 AM Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Hi Mert!
>
> Am 29.11.18 um 14:44 schrieb Mert Dirik:
> > I've created a merge request for 40-systemd at
> > https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/merge_requests/19 .
> > Reviews and comments are welcomed.
> >
> > If this is fully
On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 9:48 PM Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
>
> > AFAIK, in shell [ "${foo}" ] is equal to [ -n "${foo}" ].
>
> Not always / portably.
>
>
> I recommend
>
> test -n "$foo"
>
> for POSIX (which is equivalent to [ -n "$foo" ] but
Am 01.12.18 um 23:31 schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
> This will also make it easier to switch to a binary
> implementation later.
Ok, I take this as a positive signal. So far this has been rejected
outright.
Regards,
Michael
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
Am 01.12.18 um 23:40 schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
>> If there is a binary implementation, then you would be using
>> #!/lib/init/init-d-script
>
> Yes, but it would *also* still work with env(1).
But it would only be an unnecessary redirection.
That
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Michael Biebl wrote:
> If there is a binary implementation, then you would be using
> #!/lib/init/init-d-script
Yes, but it would *also* still work with env(1).
bye,
//mirabilos
--
>> Why don't you use JavaScript? I also don't like enabling JavaScript in
> Because I use
Am 01.12.18 um 23:31 schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
>> I'd also be interested to know why
>>
>> #!/usr/bin/env /lib/init/init-d-script
>> is preferred over
>> #!/bin/sh /lib/init/init-d-script
>> given that init-d-script is *no* C implementation.
>
> That’s
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I'd also be interested to know why
>
> #!/usr/bin/env /lib/init/init-d-script
> is preferred over
> #!/bin/sh /lib/init/init-d-script
> given that init-d-script is *no* C implementation.
That’s easy: this way, the shebang at the start of
Am 01.12.18 um 23:04 schrieb Michael Biebl:
> Am 01.12.18 um 23:00 schrieb Michael Biebl:
>> I'm still convinced, that fixing this properly in init-d-script would be
>> the much better solution. If init-d-script was implemented in C, it
>> could be used as a shebang/interpreter on non-Linux and it
Am 01.12.18 um 23:00 schrieb Michael Biebl:
> I'm still convinced, that fixing this properly in init-d-script would be
> the much better solution. If init-d-script was implemented in C, it
> could be used as a shebang/interpreter on non-Linux and it would be
> possible to have $0 be set properly.
Hi Mert!
Am 29.11.18 um 14:44 schrieb Mert Dirik:
> I've created a merge request for 40-systemd at
> https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/merge_requests/19 .
> Reviews and comments are welcomed.
>
> If this is fully applied, systemd redirection will work correctly for
> all
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
> AFAIK, in shell [ "${foo}" ] is equal to [ -n "${foo}" ].
Not always / portably.
I recommend
test -n "$foo"
for POSIX (which is equivalent to [ -n "$foo" ] but better legible and
making it clear that test is an external command, not a
[2018-11-29 16:44] Mert Dirik
> I've created a merge request for 40-systemd at
> https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/merge_requests/19 .
> Reviews and comments are welcomed.
>
> If this is fully applied, systemd redirection will work correctly for
> all init-d-script scripts (using
On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 01:24:07 +0100 Michael Biebl wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 16:01:33 + Ian Jackson
> wrote:
>
> > To the systemd maintainers: will you have time to look at this, and
> > make the appropriate change, soon ? If not then one of us could
> > probably prepare a patch, if
On 11/23/18, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 16:01:33 + Ian Jackson
> wrote:
>
>> To the systemd maintainers: will you have time to look at this, and
>> make the appropriate change, soon ? If not then one of us could
>> probably prepare a patch, if that would be helpful.
>
Hi
On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 16:01:33 + Ian Jackson
wrote:
> To the systemd maintainers: will you have time to look at this, and
> make the appropriate change, soon ? If not then one of us could
> probably prepare a patch, if that would be helpful.
A patch for 40-systemd would be highly
Control: retitle -1 Please would 40-systemd honour __init_d_script_name
Control: reassign -1 src:systemd
Mert Dirik writes ("Re: Bug#826214: Bug#913247: Please provide a C
implementation of /lib/init/init-d-script"):
> "__init_d_script_name" variable is set inside init-d-s
On 11/22/18, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Mert Dirik writes ("Re: Bug#913247: Please provide a C implementation of
> /lib/init/init-d-script"):
>> On 11/22/18, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> > So I think this would be fixed if /lib/init/init-d-script detected
>> > this situation and set $0 to the original script
Mert Dirik writes ("Re: Bug#913247: Please provide a C implementation of
/lib/init/init-d-script"):
> On 11/22/18, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > So I think this would be fixed if /lib/init/init-d-script detected
> > this situation and set $0 to the original script name (which it gets
> > in $1). That
Mert Dirik writes ("Re: Bug#913247: Please provide a C implementation of
/lib/init/init-d-script"):
> On 11/22/18, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I don't know what `systemd redirection' is. Why does it not work ?
> > Can it be fixed ?
>
> To sum it up, when /lib/lsb/init-functions is sourced from a
19 matches
Mail list logo
