Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

startup scripts moved???

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Ulrich Boeck

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 1:20:34 PM10/16/03
to
hi,

i often read documentation concerning startup files like
/etc/inet.d/inetinit

but what i found on my system (Solaris 8) is that startup will be done in
/etc/rcX.d

(for the above example this is /etc/rc2.d/S69inet)

when and why did this have changed?
why /etc/rc2.d/S69inet isn't a symbolic link to /etc/inet.d/inetinit?

Logan Shaw

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 1:29:56 PM10/16/03
to

It's not symbolic linked because the two are the same file already.
Try doing this (note that it's "-i" not "-l" here):

ls -i /etc/rc2.d/S69inet /etc/init.d/inetinit

Notice that they have the same i-node number? This means that they
are really the same file, and that file has two names, each of which
is linked into a directory. In Unix, files do not include names.
The names are stored in the directory, and the directory just
refers to an i-node number, which is how the file is reached.
Thus, you can have more than one name for the same file.

Some people refer to this as a "hard link", but I think that's
confusing, because it makes it sound like one is the original
and the others are a link to it (as in the case of symbolic links).
In reality the two are equal footing.

- Logan

Thomas Schulz

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 1:54:51 PM10/16/03
to
In article <145b4a4e.03101...@posting.google.com>,

Nothing has changed. The files in /etc/rc*.d are hard linked to the
files in /etc/init.d. Do an ls -l and you will see that the link count
is greater than one. I don't know why they are not symbolic links, but
they have always been hard links.
--
Tom Schulz
sch...@adi.com

Greg Andrews

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 3:53:46 PM10/16/03
to
U.B...@InformationFlow.de (Ulrich Boeck) writes:
>
>when and why did this have changed?
>why /etc/rc2.d/S69inet isn't a symbolic link to /etc/inet.d/inetinit?
>

Because it's a hard link, isn't it?

-Greg
--
Do NOT reply via e-mail.
Reply in the newsgroup.

Ulrich Boeck

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 5:38:33 PM10/16/03
to
Logan Shaw <lshaw-...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message news:<oAAjb.43956$X66....@twister.austin.rr.com>...

hmmm....
for some files in /etc/rc2.d this is true, for some files it isn't.

i checked that with /etc/rc2.d/K06mipagent which is in fact the same
file as
/etc/init.d/mipagent.

but in case of the /etc/rc2.d/S69inet and /etc/init.d/inetinit,
respective, this is not the case.

maybe this happened after applying a patch? or do you think i did it
while editing the /etc/init.d/inetinit file?

0 new messages