[systemd-devel] 'tasks' as first-order objects?

[Lennart Poettering]

On Fri, 13.08.10 16:22, Adam Spragg (adam at spra.gg) wrote:

> 
> On Friday 13 Aug 2010 15:54:28 Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Fri, 13.08.10 00:18, Adam Spragg (adam at spra.gg) wrote:
> > > > > So [auditctl] would be something to set to "Type=finish" and
> > > > > "ValidNoProcess=no".
> > > > > 
> > > > > (Oh, and if you have a better suggestion for a name of
> > > > > ValidNoProcess= I am all ears too!)
> > > 
> > > 'RequiresProcess='?
> > 
> > Hmm, that would turn around the logic. I'd rathe have an option that
> > defaults to "off", and when specified may be set on "on".
> 
> Maybe.
> 
> I have a long-ingrained dislike of boolean flags/variables/settings that 
> include a "no" or "not" in them. "notfound" is a particular peeve of mine in a 
> codebase I'm currently working on. Deciphering "!notfound" and "notfound" 
> unnecessarily requires more brain cycles than "found" and "!found" would have. 
> I have to stop and check I'm doing what I think I'm doing every time I come 
> across it. I also have the same problem with UIs that have checkboxes marked 
> "disable feature X". It's just *awkward* - more so than it needs to
> be.

Yes, I share the same belief, which is one of the reasons I'd be happy
to rename this.

So, Kay and I came up with these two ideas:

  KeepAfterExit=
  ActiveAfterExit=

Opinions? Preferences?

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.