[Pm-utils] RFC - PATCH to functions.in to support Slackware init

[Michael Biebl]

2008/10/30 Victor Lowther <victor.lowther at gmail.com>:
> On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 23:15 -0500, Robby Workman wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:44:39 -0500
>> Victor Lowther <victor.lowther at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Oct 29, 2008, at 4:02 PM, Robby Workman <rw at rlworkman.net> wrote:
>> > > I like the idea, I think.  I almost prefer to have those named in a
>> > > format of "$distro.functions" and "$distro.pm-functions" though.
>> > > This, of course, would require testing if the directory is not empty
>> > > and then sourcing all of its contents if not, or perhaps this, to
>> > > add (probably needless) complexity:  a --with-distro=$distro
>> > > configure flag, and then configure could write that value into the
>> > > stock functions files so that it knows what to source.  Did that
>> > > make any sense? :-)
>> >
>> > Well, Part of the idea is that upstream pm-utils would not do
>> > anything in the distro.d directory - it would be there for the
>> > distros to use or ignore as they choose. I don't want to be in the
>> > business of maintaining every distro-specific method for doing
>> > something out there
>> > - I just want to provide sane defaults and make it easy for distro
>> > maintainers to customize things. Giving y'all a designated place and
>> > a method to do so is part of that goal.

FWIW, I think distro specific changes can be easily managed with patches.
Imo the only relevant function in functions.in which would need distro
customization is (stop,restart)service.
Everything else is generic.

Adding a whole infrastructure (which can be misused) to support distro
overrides seems like overkill to me.

Cheers,
Michael

-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?