On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 08:07:07PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 13.02.13 20:05, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
>
> > Actually, the syntax already is _not_ a subset of the shell, and has its
> > own pecularities. Anyone trying to blindly follow shell rules is going
> > to be severly bitten anyway. So, why not go a bit further and change
> > the syntax in a way that is useful for our users?
>
> It's certainly true that we are not compatible with shell, and that we
> aren't even trying to be. But in this regard I see no reason to deviate.
>
> But let's take one step back. Can you make a good case why comments
> should trump continuation lines?
Status quo:
useful only for long lines with a hash mark in the middle.
Proposed:
useful for commenting out a single line of a multi-line stanza,
by editing only that line, which should be less error-prone.
Repeating the example from the original bug report:
SPAMD_ARGS="--socketpath=/var/lib/bulwark/spamd \
--nouser-config \
--virtual-config-dir=/var/lib/bulwark/domains/%l/%d \
--siteconfigpath=/var/lib/bulwark/config \
--username=bulwark \
--max-children=25 \
--timeout-child=600"
||
\/
SPAMD_ARGS="--socketpath=/var/lib/bulwark/spamd \
--nouser-config \
--virtual-config-dir=/var/lib/bulwark/domains/%l/%d \
--siteconfigpath=/var/lib/bulwark/config \
#--username=bulwark \
--username=myusername \
--max-children=25 \
--timeout-child=600"
> To me that doesn't even sound so
> useful, and it would in fact surprise me if things would work that
> way...
Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
