On 05/03/07, Holger Macht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue 06. Mar - 00:21:56, Michael Biebl wrote:
> 2007/3/5, Holger Macht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >On Mon 05. Mar - 22:38:57, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> This has come up before already, but without conclusion I think, so
> >> here goes...
> >>
> >> I think (and the FHS with me) that /etc is the wrong place for
> >> pm/functions and pm/hooks, etc. They are not supposed to be edited by the
> >> sysadmin.
> >>
> >> A better place would be /usr/lib IMHO, the FHS:
> >>
> >> /usr/lib includes object files, libraries, and internal binaries that
> >> are not intended to be executed directly by users or shell scripts.
> >>
> >> Some people would say /usr/share:
> >>
> >> The /usr/share hierarchy is for all read-only architecture independent
> >> data files
> >>
> >> Apart from this, maybe we do want to allow the admin to install additional,
> >> custom hooks in /etc/pm/hooks. Should these be executed before, after or
> >> sorted in between the hooks form the packages, what do you think?
> >
> >Hm, the admin configures pm-utils below /etc/pm and puts additional hooks
> >into /usr/lib/pm/...? What would be wrong with that?
> >
>
> I agree with Tim that /etc/pm/functions should be put into /usr/lib/pm.
Me too.
> The problem about the hooks is, that they are activated/deactivated
> via the x-bit. It would be a bit odd to have to change the x bit of a
> file in /usr/lib/pm.
>
> Maybe using symlinks would be a better idea anyway, similar to /etc/init.d
I think this sounds reasonable. Something like a symlink from
/etc/pm/hooks to /usr/lib/pm/hooks or the like?
If we are changing the hooks location, can we make it sleep.d and not hooks?
Richard.
_______________________________________________
Pm-utils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-utils
