[Pm-utils] Re: Resume via quirks, not using the DBUS method, Was: Release Candidates ?

Stefan Seyfried seife at suse.de
Fri Mar 9 07:45:14 PST 2007

On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:01:03PM -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
> I find myself wondering if /etc/pm/config shouldn't really
> be /usr/lib/pm-utils/config , actually.  That would make /etc/pm
> entirely the domain of the admin (and any ISV software he adds)

Yes, so we'd first source /usr/lib/pm-utils/config, then /etc/pm/config.
So the distro can put good defaults into /usr/lib/pm-utils/config which
the user/admin can overwrite in /etc/pm/config. Sounds good.
I'd still keep the /usr/lib/pm-utils/config well commented, so the admin
can use it as a template for his own verion in /etc/pm/config.
> I'd say the distros should be using /usr/lib/pm-utils/*/ instead,
> though.  If you think about it, they're basically acting as a proxy for
> us at fd.o.  Which is to say, in some respect we're sharing one task
> with them, whereas a 3rd party package vendor (such as freshrpms, for
> example) is really doing things on behalf of the admin, rather than as a
> vendor.


> > Can't we just get rid of the symlink and install two files rather than
> > one with special casing that changes the execution depending on the
> > symlink name?
> I'd really rather maintain one 114 line script that has a special case
> that winds up being 5 lines for each (of two) choices than two 100 line
> scripts that have 95 lines the same.

100% ACK. Otherwise we have to take care to fix bugs in two scripts
instead of one ;-)
Stefan Seyfried

"Any ideas, John?"
"Well, surrounding them's out." 

More information about the Pm-utils mailing list