Re: [Tails-dev] memlockd stopped too soon

hi,

Ague Mill wrote (04 Jun 2012 14:35:13 GMT) :
> I kept the number for memlockd and moved the rest after it.

> But that was not enough to really get that order: as said erliar, we use
> insserv. So `tails-sdmem-on-media-removal` now has a `Required-Start`
> dependency on both `tails-reconfigure-kexec` and
> `tails-reconfigure-memlockd` instead of `memlockd`.

> This is really a tiny issue, but it felt more correct that way.

Thanks for the explanations and for the design doc update!

Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc