[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       xen-devel
Subject:    Re: [Xen-devel] xendomains init script
From:       Florian Kirstein <xenlist () custom ! ray ! net>
Date:       2007-02-28 17:26:00
Message-ID: 20070228182600.E27835 () web ! ray ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

> Or does that not work?
Exactly. The LSB way does not work on Redhat-based distributions prior
to RHEL5. And that's not /really/ a RH bug, as LSB explicitly allows their
alias implementation, which unfortunately can't be used the way the script
tries to. Really a silly problem caused by the LSB spec allowing aliases.

> Why is the LSB case moved to after the RedHat case? LSB looks like a more
> specific check (it looks for a file with 'lsb' in the path for a start!)
No, LSB is the most generic check, as most distributions have LSB
compliance scripts today. As the script's first check is for SUSE's
/etc/rc.status, it's only logical to check for RedHat's /etc/init.d/functions
second, and only then go for the generic case, LSB. Especially as that
doesn't work on all current RedHat's and causes
/etc/rc.d/init.d/xendomains: line 67: log_success_msg: command not found
errors turning up in all (Fedora, Redhat) bugzillas :)

I don't see any non-redhat Distribution having an /etc/init.d/functions
(which does not implement the RH success and failure function), so it should
cause no problem to move this up, but it will make the problem disappear on
all RH and Fedora Versions out there. And as RHs old LSB implementation
isn't a bug (according to the spec), we have to fix our init script and can't
hope for fixes in older Fedora/RedHat's LSB. See my post last year...

(:ul8er, r@y

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]