I feel like using symlinks for the upstart files already resolved most of what you could remedy by having an additional zabbix-setup job. As things are now, it would mean pulling one line from the generic upstart file and creating a new job just for creating a runtime directory. There is no benefit for administrators either because the services files are renamed to a generic version when building the package so there is ever only one upstart file present when deployed. To me, adding the additional job feels more like adding additional complexity rather than optimization.
If you feel passionate about this, I would be okay with adding the additional setup job, but I can see little benefit in doing so. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1047837 Title: Upstart support for Zabbix services To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/zabbix/+bug/1047837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
