Thinking forward LFS-7.0
dj at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Mar 14 15:59:05 PDT 2011
Robert Xu <robxu9 at gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 16:45, Ken Moffat <ken at linuxfromscratch.org>
>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 11:39:04PM -0500, DJ Lucas wrote:
>>> * Dynamic boot script - No more static list of links, this kind of
>>> into LSB Bootscripts, but there are other options.
>> I don't know what you mean by this ? It's the first time I've heard
>> the phrase "dynamic boot script". I hope this isn't anything to do
>> with upstart or systemd, what I've seen of those fills me with a
>> mixture of horror and disgust ;)
No, still sysvinit, though other options are easier if they can use the LSB comment block.
>The LSB bootscripts work similar to insserv on (newer) Debian and SuSE,
Actually, those tools likely use the LSB install_initd and remove_initd in some way or work with the LSB headers in a compatible way to the LSB tools. What I meant by dynamic is in allocation of symlinks. No more list to keep track of as scripts have dependency information in the LSB comment block. Installing an init script is simplified to:
install -v -m755 foo /etc/init.d &&
Additionally, if a vendor provides a compliant init script, then there is no need to maintain our own script as the output should be consistent per the spec. You could also use tools like insserv or chkconfig (though chkconfig requires redhat specific comments immediately below the LSB comment block). This is the last part that LFS has to add to make BLFS capable of LSB compliancy, without replacing the lfs-bootscripts in BLFS.
The other option I mentioned is to simply add the LSB comment blocks to the begining of the existing scripts, but then we possibly loose the consistent look (although I could work around that pretty easily).
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
More information about the lfs-dev