https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=221714 ------- Comment #7 from hmacht@novell.com 2006-11-17 04:38 MST -------
[I'm wondering why we don't make use of /etc/sysconfig as an indirection layer. /etc/sysconfig/powersave/* already exists. I'm just asking, I'm no familiar with powersave features.]
This question is very valid :-) Upstream has /etc/pm/config. We do not want to diverge from upstream (we are part of it), and pm-utils is supposed to be pretty much the same on all Distributions.
Actually the real issue is that the filesystem structure of pm-utils is plain wrong. Arch independent scripts should be in /usr/lib/pm-utils and the config in /etc. This way we could simply create a symlink to from /etc/pm-utils to /etc/sysconfig/pm-utils which I already do for powersaved. But that's definitely nothing we want to argue about upstream at current point in time :-( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.