Hide Forgot
Description of problem: When chkconfig --add heartbeat is run, links are done with names like: S-1heartbeat which chkconfig doesn't understand itself so it doesn't guess start order correctly. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): chkconfig-1.3.6 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. chkconfig --add heartbeat 2. chkconfig --list heartbeat 3. chkconfig --del heartbeat Actual results: chkconfig calculates run order number -1 while when doing links into runlevel directories. Expected results: chkconfig should have calculated number like 75 Additional info: Multiline description field parser is broken too. It barfs when description is wirtten to different line than Description: header. Like: # Description: # Here comes exellent multi # line # description
Created attachment 90484 [details] heartbeat 1.0.1 init-script (slightly modified)
Short LSB remark: > # Required-Start: network time syslog > # Required-Stop: network time syslog This should be rather: # Required-Start: $network $time $syslog see http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/refspecs/LSB_1.3.0/gLSB/gLSB/facilname.html
LSB comments still broken in Fedora Core 1. End up with S-1 and K-1 links.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES release 3 (Taroon) chkconfig 1.3.8 I think I found the bug which causes LSB style dependencies to be ignored: In chkconfig.c, function addService(), the if statement if (s.isLSB && (s.sPriority == s.kPriority == -1)) frobDependencies(&s); does not work. I think it would be true only if the comparison result (s.sPriority == s.kPriority) is -1, but the result is 1. It does not check whether both values are -1. This should be replaced with if (s.isLSB && ((s.sPriority == -1) || (s.kPriority == -1))) frobDependencies(&s); to call frobDependencies() if one of the priorities is not specified in the script, or if (s.isLSB && (s.sPriority == -1) && (s.kPriority == -1)) frobDependencies(&s); to call frobDependencies() only if both priorities are not specified. Bodo
Fixed in CVS, thanks!
An errata has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on the solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2004-332.html
An errata has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on the solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2004-333.html