Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: sshd no longer starting when it should.
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 21:49:47
Message-Id: isoql4$o77$1@dough.gmane.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sshd no longer starting when it should. by Alan McKinnon
1 On 2011-06-08, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote:
2 > Apparently, though unproven, at 22:43 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Grant Edwards
3 >
4 >> # Do we allow any started service in the runlevel to satisfy the
5 >> dependency # or do we want all of them regardless of state? For example,
6 >> if net.eth0 # and net.eth1 are in the default runlevel then with
7 >> rc_depend_strict="NO" # both will be started, but services that depend on
8 >> 'net' will work if either # one comes up. With rc_depend_strict="YES" we
9 >> would require them both to # come up.
10 >> #rc_depend_strict="YES"
11 >>
12 >> I had assumed that since the line setting it to YES was commented out
13 >> that the default was NO, and you uncommented the line to set it to
14 >> YES. I don't know where that belief came from, but it's wrong -- the
15 >> commented out line apparently shows the default.
16 >
17 > Yes, that stuff can get confusing and it's easy to get it mixed up.
18
19 I had that stuck pretty firmly in my head, so there must have been
20 something I was working with recently which did things the other way
21 'round where uncommenting lines caused behavior to change.
22
23 > The way it's done is the only really sane way - consider how it would
24 > play out if the setting was a value or a list of possibilities - you
25 > couldn't put a commented example in there that is the opposite of the
26 > default
27
28 True.
29
30 --
31 Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! It was a JOKE!!
32 at Get it?? I was receiving
33 gmail.com messages from DAVID
34 LETTERMAN!! !