Re: Q re missing rc.local file
From: Gene Heskett (gene.heskett_at_verizon.net)
Date: 08/05/05
- Previous message: Rogerio Eduardo Oliveira: "GeForce 4 MX 400"
- In reply to: Bob Proulx: "Re: Q re missing rc.local file"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 15:09:29 -0400 To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
On Friday 05 August 2005 11:03, Bob Proulx wrote:
[...]
>> > cp skeleton localrc
>> > editor localrc # edit as you desire
>>
>> Ahh, that I can handle. I take it it gets sourced if it exists as
>> localrc?
>
>It gets sourced because it has a symlink to it (created with
>update-rc.d in my example) which points to it from rc2.d. I only
>called it localrc here in the example. I almost called it
>"mypersonallocalrc" for emphasis and perhaps should have. Or
> perhaps I should have called it exactly "rc.local" as in your
> previous system. The name really does not matter. I was just
> typing in names fast and furiously. I should have called it
> rc.local to match your previous name.
>
>> >In any case, there is a tool to set up the symlinks that can be
>> >thought of as a chkconfig like tool.
>> >
>> > update-rc.d localrc defaults
>> >
>> > This is really a scripting interface. So normally users don't
>> > need to know about the command. But it is used in packages in
>> > the postinst script. And the reverse removal is 'update-rc.d
>> > localrc remove'.
>>
>> But, what do I do it aI want to remove boinc, but not setibatch?
>> Obviously we're back to hand editing. I'm capable of that.
>
>You have lost me. I know "setibatch" is how you are starting the
> seti tools. You did not mention "boinc" previously but I will
> assume it is another thing you want run at startup. Given that, I
> don't understand your question at all. If you put it in then you
> can take it out, right?
Well, I'm also running boinc/einstein here on this box & I thought it
might be usefull to set it up on the debian box too.
And, TBT, I was trolling a bit as I don't have seperate startups for
them now. In fact, I got so sick of boinc taking over the machine &
the boinc folks couldn't seem to understand the problem I was having.
They weren't giving the clients a -nice 19, so my boinc starter file
found its way into vim & that got fixed right fast after I figured it
out what was hogging the machine so bad.
>I am starting out with the scene you had set that you had created an
>rc.local
I, nor any other RH/fedora user needs to create it, its part of the
basic install, even has a line in it that says put all your stuff
below here please. So I did :)
>on your previous system and wanted to transfer that local
> rc startup to your Debian system. In that case pretty much
> anything you did in the old rc.local you would do on your new
> system too. If you started both of those in rc.local then you
> could start both of those in one script now too. If you want to
> create individual scripts one for each of those then that is fine
> too. Because your comment loses me I would need more input to
> suggest more.
>
>> Maybe a different tack needs to be taken by way of having an
>> etc/local dir, and anything placed it it gets sourced at startup?
>> Is something like that possible in the future?
>
>You can easily create this yourself. See the run-parts command for
> a useful utility in this process. You could package up a generic
> startup interface and submit it to the community. Others might
> find that useful too.
>
> man run-parts
I'll certainly dig into that in the next day or so. Thanks.
>But pretty soon you will find that ordering is a problem. So you
>would probably create a directory that contains the real scripts and
> a second directory that contains symlinks to those scripts. The
> name of the symlink could contain a number to force a startup
> ordering independent of the underlying name. If you notice I have
> just proposed that the logical conclusion of doing this is that we
> would have exactly the same system that we already have with the
> /etc/init.d and /etc/rc*.d directories! :-)
:-)
>[Of course the Gentoo folks have a different startup system with
>declared dependencies and an automatic ordering that they like. And
>there are parties in Debian proposing similar things too.
> Personally I like the current system best. But choices are good.]
They are what makes the world work.
Thanks Bob. By the time you hear from that machine, it will be moved
back out to the shop and hooked up to a micro-mill. I just a few
minutes ago, put the final screws in the Z axis motor mount. All 3
axis's now have 280 oz/in stepper motors driving them. Should be
neat once up and running. :-)
>Bob
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
- Previous message: Rogerio Eduardo Oliveira: "GeForce 4 MX 400"
- In reply to: Bob Proulx: "Re: Q re missing rc.local file"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
