sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>
- To: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
- Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs
- Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 10:37:05 -0700
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 10:22:55AM -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
> Quoting Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>:
> > On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 08:34:36AM -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
> > > If the "nfs" script is not executable (i.e. disabled), will autofs
> > > still be
> > able
> > > to start? I'm asking because this sounds like a bug in our script
> > dependencies,
> > > but not everyone uses NFS, but they might use autofs, and I don't want
> > > to
> > break
> > > one just to fix the other.
> > >
> > > -sandalle
> >
> > You mean to add some sort of missing or non-executable dependency logic
> > that automatically turns on a disabled dependency? I could see this
> > happening so long as we sent an note to the system log. A true missing
> > dependency should never happen because the dependency will be written
> > into our spell dependency system, but perhaps we should look into what
> > should be done in that case as well.
>
> Not turns on the disabled dependency, but continues if the dependency is
> disabled, such as a 'WANTS="nfs"', where autofs will start after nfs if it's
> enabled, but otherwise ignore nfs (if it's disabled/not installed).
Ahh optional dependencies... that could be done pretty easily, I think
Seth
--
Seth Alan Woolley [seth at positivism.org], SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id EF10E21A = 36AD 8A92 8499 8439 E6A8 3724 D437 AF5D EF10 E21A
http://smgl.positivism.org:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xEF10E21A
Security Team Leader Source Mage GNU/Linux http://www.sourcemage.org
Attachment:
pgpMJCJNLVQRl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs,
Lyon Lemmens, 07/09/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs, ruskie, 07/09/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs,
Jason Flatt, 07/09/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs,
Eric Sandall, 07/09/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs,
Seth Alan Woolley, 07/09/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs,
Eric Sandall, 07/09/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs, Seth Alan Woolley, 07/09/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs,
Eric Sandall, 07/09/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs,
Seth Alan Woolley, 07/09/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] autofs & nfs,
Eric Sandall, 07/09/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.