*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 60429 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/60429
On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 09:39 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 12:55:13PM -0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > The missing documentation is somewhat deliberate, since we don't want
> > people relying on file formats or paths that are likely to change. It
> > will be present eventually
>
> Er, we are talking about _free_ software, aren't we? ;-)
>
Yes, anybody is free to write documentation for me <g>
Though we're also talking about _in_development_ software; aspects of
the things being documented are still likely to change, often quite
radically -- until Upstart's design (not to mention file formats) are
stable, I don't want to document them because I don't want people
relying on it and complaining when it breaks.
> I suppose I'll just have to read the fine source code. It would be nice
> to be able to see what this new "init" offers that the "traditional one"
> (whatever that means) doesn't. It looks like the syntax of the
> configuration file(s) is easier, but at the cost of the config being
> fragmented into many files.
>
Principally, no more runlevels and instead defining when each job is
started individually.
> It looks like some of the config filenames are reserved for special purposes.
>
No, there's no reserved names.
> What I actually want to do is to get more virtual terminals running. I
> suppose I can just follow the pattern of the existing ones. But it would
> be nice not to have to guess.
>
See /usr/share/doc/upstart/README.Debian if you're using Ubuntu.
Scott
--
Scott James Remnant
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
init(8) manpage vague.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/147263
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu (via bug 60429).
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
