Bug 597732

Summary: init script doesn't support status argument
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Bob Tennent <rdtennent>
Component: privoxyAssignee: Karsten Hopp <karsten>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 14CC: karsten
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-08-16 18:38:09 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
correct init script for privoxy none

Description Bob Tennent 2010-05-30 10:19:47 UTC 
Description of problem: Because the init script doesn't support the usual status argument, system-config-services says the service is either dead or "being refreshed" even when it's fine.



Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): up to and including rawhide (fc14)


How reproducible: 


Steps to Reproduce:
1. run system-config-services
2. if the privoxy service is enabled, it'll display as "dead" even if started
3. if it's enabled, it'll display as "being refreshed"
  
Actual results:
as above

Expected results:
proper display of status

Additional info: Because privoxy dies relatively frequently, correct status information is needed.
Comment 1 Bob Tennent 2010-06-18 15:25:40 UTC 
The /etc/init.d/privoxy script from privoxy-3.0.3-9.3.el5 seems to work fine (in Fedora).
Comment 2 Bob Tennent 2010-06-19 01:32:04 UTC 
Created attachment 425277 [details]
correct init script for privoxy
Comment 3 Bob Tennent 2010-06-19 01:34:43 UTC 
The privoxy package on Fedora uses the upstream privoxy-generic.init; but it should be
using an init script suitable for Fedora, which, for some reason, was omitted from the upstream tarball. I've attached it.
Comment 4 Bug Zapper 2010-07-30 11:45:41 UTC 
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 14 development cycle.
Changing version to '14'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Comment 5 Fedora End Of Life 2012-08-16 18:38:11 UTC 
This message is a notice that Fedora 14 is now at end of life. Fedora 
has stopped maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 14. It is 
Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no 
longer maintained.  At this time, all open bugs with a Fedora 'version'
of '14' have been closed as WONTFIX.

(Please note: Our normal process is to give advanced warning of this 
occurring, but we forgot to do that. A thousand apologies.)

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, feel free to reopen 
this bug and simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we were unable to fix it before Fedora 14 reached end of life. If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged to click on 
"Clone This Bug" (top right of this page) and open it against that 
version of Fedora.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping