Linux Standards Base

Dan Nicholson dbn.lists at gmail.com
Tue Oct 27 06:35:01 PDT 2009


On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Bryan Kadzban
<bryan at kadzban.is-a-geek.net> wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Couldn't find install_initd
>
> See bootscripts/contrib/lsb-v3 in the book repository for this one.
> Personally, since I never use this interface (since symlinks don't
> confuse me :-P ), I don't want it, but...
>
> Note that I believe it also requires either symlinks, or moving all the
> bootscripts around -- /etc/init.d/, /etc/rc?.d/, etc. not all those same
> paths under /etc/rc.d/ where they stay out of the way of /etc tab
> completion.  That may not be a strict LSB requirement, but I think I
> remember DJ talking about it at one point when doing the lsb-v3 thing.

The point here is that a 3rd party package doesn't need to know how
your init implementation works. It supplies a script that says what
runlevels and dependencies are needed in the header. Then it can put
the script in /etc/init.d and call install_initd. That's it. Whether
you're using symlinks in rc.d or using something like upstart in
compat mode, the 3rd party doesn't need to know or care about it.

The major reason for the existence of the LSB is to support ISVs who
want to distribute software for linux. They want to have some base to
be able to say "here's a package that will work on your system". If
you don't want or need to support that, the LSB is not for you.

--
Dan



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list