[wellylug] Re: how to adapt this iptables setup?

[Bret Comstock Waldow]

On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 19:09, Brian Boutel wrote:
>  
> 
> Johann Koenig wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:15:27 -0400
> > Bret Comstock Waldow <bwaldow at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Ok.  There is no /etc/rc.d in my Debian system.  /etc/rcX.d has some
> >>meaning beyond just being another place to gather files - it
> >>corresponds to runlevel X, and gets swept automatically as the system
> >>passes through that runlevel.  What is the meaning and equivalent of
> >>/etc/rc.d?  The other directories referenced appear to exist.
> > 
> > 
> > Usually scripts are put in /etc/init.d in debian and symlinked to
> > /etc/rcX.d (X being the runlevel) with the appropriate Sxx/Kxx (xx
> > corresponding to the order in which the scripts are run) prefix. I would
> > assume from what you are saying is that /etc/rc.d is the RH equiv of
> > /etc/init.d
> 
> 
> No. In RH, /etc/rc.d contains links to the various /etc/rcX.d 
> directories and init.d, and misc rc files like rc, rc.local and rc.sysinit.
> 
> I assume that conventions have changed over time, so the present mess is 
> designed to ensure that programs that refer to /etc/rcX.d/Sxxscript or 
> to /etc/rc.d/rcX.d/Sxxscript will all work.

Ummm.

A link in rcX.d like S03something calls script something in init.d as
the system enters runlevel X.  Thats my understanding of how runlevels
control starting and stopping services, programs, etc.

Now, you're adding the wrinkle of something (besides the runlevel
process) calling the SXXscripts?  Do I have to try to take something
like that into consideration in figuring out where to park these
scripts?  What facility involves something besides the runlevel
processing calling a SXXscript?

The mind boggles, as does the idea of any standardization.

Bret

-- 
bwaldow at alum dot mit dot edu