[Fedora-packaging] Drafts for next Tuesday

Bill Nottingham notting at redhat.com
Thu Mar 20 02:58:01 UTC 2008

Tom spot Callaway (tcallawa at redhat.com) said: 
> InitDir location (spot) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/InitDir

Should this just be merged into the later draft?

> SysV-style Initscript Guidelines (spot) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/SysVInitScript


1) I'm of the opinion that LSB headers should be optional. There is no
requirement in the LSB for any system scripts to be LSB compliant, and
it can cause issues with ordering.

2) Various times it is stated that:

Note: Fedora's init daemons (sysvinit, upstart) do not currently use
non-system boot facilities defined in the <some LSB> line when ordering
initscripts. Fedora packagers must ensure that they have priority ordering
set correctly in the chkconfig header.

This is incorrect. What happens is that on script enablement (chkconfig --add)
and script activation/deactivation (chkconfig on/chkconfig off) the LSB
dependencies are read, and the start and stop priorities of the scripts
are then adjusted to satisfy those dependencies.

What this means:

- dependencies are honored (albeit in a static mechanism)
- if you use LSB headers, your start and stop priority may end up being
  different than what's in the chkconfig: line

This is the same for both upstart (as it is implemented now) and sysvinit.

3) Standardizing on try-restart when we have generally accepted use of
'condrestart' seems problematic.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list