At Tue, 27 Nov 2012 16:33:57 +0100, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Tue, 27 Nov 2012 13:38:38 +0100, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Michal Kubeček wrote:
On Tuesday 27 of November 2012 11:21EN, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
The person decided to do it via shell hacks as it was quite common to do it that way back then. It's a good thing to get rid of such hacks and patch the features into daemon itself anyways, indepedent of whether or not systemd is used for booting.
As far as I can say from the proposed config, the features are actually implemented in atd and the "hacks" just translate sysconfig variables to command line parameters. Many init scripts do things like this as daemons rarely parse /etc/sysconfig themselves.
So? We are talking about free software here. Add a few lines of C and they do. No need to add shell wrappers.
True, but only if parsing (SUSE-specific) sysconfig variables is acceptable for the upstream, too. In other words, if such a patch won't be merged to the upstream, we'll need to carry over the patch forever. It'd be much more pain than maintaining an init shell script.
I don't agree. Whether or not such a patch would be openSUSE specific is also questionable. Looks like at least Fedora also wants to have atd parameters configurable. Maybe upstream would be open to accepting a patch for a global config file (in whatever format)? You will never find out if you don't even ask and keep writing shell wrappers.
Sure, I don't mean to stick *only* with the init shell script. It's broken for systemd, thus it must be fixed. No doubt about it. And the fix should be done together with the upstream at best indeed. Go ahead. However, a random patching in SUSE package can be rather a pain by itself alone. As mentioned, it's often harder to maintain unless accepted in the upstream. So, the key is the collaborative fix with the upstream. It might be a few lines of C code, but it needs lots of social tasks in addition. The background I write this is that, honestly speaking, I can hardly imagine that a SUSE-specific sysconfig is acceptable as a common infrastructure over all distros. If I were to get a patch from a Canonical guy to add a patch to parse Ubuntu's config file to any ALSA util programs, I'd reject it :) A typical and likely solution will be to introduce a new config file in the end, with a hope that the downstream will follow to change their tools like YaST for managing the new config file. This is a cleaner solution, but takes a long long way... Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org