Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (2912 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] Which start-up script?
  • From: Doug B <suse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 19:46:21 -0600
  • Message-id: <200502151946.21457.suse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Tuesday 15 February 2005 01:24 pm, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> The Monday 2005-02-14 at 20:04 -0600, Doug B wrote:
> > On Monday 14 February 2005 01:57 pm, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> > > If you create the links yourself, Yast will remove them the next
> > > time you install or remove any system service.
> >
> > Yes... and no.
> >
> > I wanted to start smbfs later than yast/SuSE wanted to. Not
> > knowing any other way, I renamed it from S08smbfs to S21smbfs in
> > ../rc5.d. The next time I used the runlevel editor in yast (for
> > something unrelated to smbfs), it did delete the S21... and created
> > it as S08... again. This time I deleted the S08... and created in
> > ../rc5.d a S21my_smbfs link to the /etc/init.d/smbfs script. That
> > one holds up after using the runlevel editor.
> I think I remember you saying that time ago. But I don't know if that
> behaviour is intentional or a bug, and will be corrected at some
> time.
> Because, from the documentation, I'd think the S08smbfs should be
> created again, even if S21my_smbfs would remain in place, ignored.

You remember correctly. You pointed some things out for me. Thanks
again for that.

The S08smbfs does get created again. Since it fails, the S21my_smbfs
tries again and succeeds. I suppose I could "uncheck" smbfs in the
runlevel editor and then only the S21... would be there.

What I should do is find out what I have that needs to load before smbfs
and fix the script so it gets loaded in the proper sequence, but then
again, there are many things I *should* do. It's working. I'll worry
about it another time.


< Previous Next >
Follow Ups