[Pm-utils] RFC - PATCH to functions.in to support Slackware init

[Dan Nicholson]

On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Stefan Seyfried <seife at suse.de> wrote:
> Robby Workman wrote:
>> Attached is an "idea" patch - in other words, I don't intend for this
>> to be considered for committing upstream; rather, I'm really just
>> wanting to flesh out whether what I have in mind is horribly bad. :-)
>>
>> Here's the patch (it's also attached, in case some mail clients munge
>> the content.  My thoughts are *in* the patch ; responses?  :-)
>
>> +# Also, we (Slackware) have some init scripts that don't have a "status"
>> +# directive in them, so maybe using that to check if something is running
>> +# won't always work.
>
> OTOH "service" and the "status" method of init scripts is LSB since quite some
> time IIUC, so why not just fix the slackware init scripts?

service is not LSB. It's just a wrapper that makes initializing
services straightforward across distros. The LSB says that all
services should be installed in /etc/init.d, but it says nothing about
how the system will actually execute the scripts. Maybe service should
be in the LSB, but it's not.

http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/initsrcinstrm.html

Robby's point about ambiguous service names is valid, though. Right
now, we only call stopservice() for ntpd, but it could be called ntp
or nettime or anything else since there's no convention for that.

--
Dan