On 3/14/07, Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/14/07, Lucas C. Villa Real <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I don't like too much to have more config files spread over
> > /System/Settings. What about moving everything to these files (again),
> > writing simple pre/post tasks as functions inside them? Another option
> > is to enhance NetworkOptions like this:
> >
> > eth0_pre_hook() {
> > echo "hi"
> > }
> > eth0_post_hook() {
> > echo "bye"
> > }
> > eth0_IP=10.0.202.21
> > ...
> >
>
> I thought of that but I was worried about scope. My sh scripting is
> rusty. Ok, after a quick test the scope isn't a problem.
>
>
> On 3/13/07, Hisham Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > If you feel it's the solution, go for it. As usual, my only concern is
> > that adding features to boot-related scripts adds code potentially
> > slowing the boot process down.
>
> I think we should optimize for the noop case. Which is better, a file
> test ( [ -f /path/foo ] ) or searching the path? The file test is a
> bash builtin so it should be cheap. Searching the path should be a
> file test for each path entry. During boot, PATH is only /S/L/Exec
> and /S/L/Tasks, right?
Right. WRT performance, I believe functions instead of separate files
are faster, actually. [ "`type -t bla`" = "function" ] will do no disk
access to find a function (test and type are builtins). If the
function is not there it will run through the PATH, but that is
hashed, I think.
> I guess I'd prefer a single config file. Slightly slower but more
> convenient. We could include empty functions for eth0. The would
> document them as well.
Makes sense.
-- Hisham
_______________________________________________
gobolinux-devel mailing list
gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
