2007/3/9, Frederic Crozat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Le vendredi 09 mars 2007 à 16:45 +0100, Stefan Seyfried a écrit :
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:01:03PM -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
>
> > I find myself wondering if /etc/pm/config shouldn't really
> > be /usr/lib/pm-utils/config , actually. That would make /etc/pm
> > entirely the domain of the admin (and any ISV software he adds)
>
> Yes, so we'd first source /usr/lib/pm-utils/config, then /etc/pm/config.
> So the distro can put good defaults into /usr/lib/pm-utils/config which
> the user/admin can overwrite in /etc/pm/config. Sounds good.
> I'd still keep the /usr/lib/pm-utils/config well commented, so the admin
> can use it as a template for his own verion in /etc/pm/config.
>
> > I'd say the distros should be using /usr/lib/pm-utils/*/ instead,
> > though. If you think about it, they're basically acting as a proxy for
> > us at fd.o. Which is to say, in some respect we're sharing one task
> > with them, whereas a 3rd party package vendor (such as freshrpms, for
> > example) is really doing things on behalf of the admin, rather than as a
> > vendor.
Using /usr/lib/pm-utils/ for all hooks is wrong since those hooks are
scripts. They should be in /usr/share/pm-utils/
BTW, pm-utils SVN is clearly not lib64 compliant (where libdir
is /usr/lib64).
We tried to fixed it in our package, see patches at :
As long as the files are non-executable, your statement is correct.
IIRC /usr/share must be mountable noexec and ro, so only data files
must be placed there.
Yet, I'd prefer it anyway, if we wouldn't use the x-bit hack to
determine if a file should be sourced or not. So, /usr/(lib, or better
share)/pm-utils/defaults,functions,power.d/*,sleep.d(or better
functions.d)/* should all be read-only.
If a file is sourced or not is determined if there is a link to the
corresponding directory in /etc/pm/.
Just my 2cents,
Michael
_______________________________________________
Pm-utils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-utils
