From: "Chris Kloiber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > And so far I have not found an explanation for the format of the first
> > few lines of comment that appear in any WORKING init.d file. It appears
> > the formatting is insanely finiky, too. I tried to build an addition and
> > never did get it to behave the way I wanted. <sigh>
> Do you mean this stuff?:
>
> # chkconfig: 345 56 50
>
> These are default values for chkconfig. If I understand it properly this
> means (in this case) this script is on by default at runlevels 3, 4, and 5
> Starting order is 56 (/etc/rc{3,4,5}.d/S56xinetd) and a Kill order of 50
> (/etc/rc{0,1,2,6}.d/K50xinetd)
>
> Some of the other lines are self explanatory, although I'm not sure if
> they are required (description, processname, config, pidfile)
Actually with the version I was working on I figured SOME of those values
were self explanatory. So I built that into a file. The tools that parsed
it and setup the rc.d hierarchy barfed on the results. It appears each one
of the lines in the header is "magic" and must precisely meet the expected
format or it is tossed. I had to select a file that matched what I wanted,
copy ALL the lines at the top with # as the first character and then LIGHTLY
edit it to change the program name.
I sincerely hope the gumpuses who generated ntsysv and chkconfig et al have
lightened up a little or else documented precisely what they are looking for.
It got more than modestly annoying. I was using language unbecoming a lady.
For that matter I was using language unbecoming a very frustrated and angry
Marine out on patrol in the jungle.
{o.o}
_______________________________________________
Seawolf-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/seawolf-list
