On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> wrote: > On Mon, 06.08.12 01:14, Colin Guthrie (gm...@colin.guthr.ie) wrote: > >> >> 'Twas brillig, and Lennart Poettering at 03/08/12 19:46 did gyre and gimble: >> > Maybe DontRestartExitStatus=? The libc calls the generalization of >> > exit code and exit signal the "exit status", so that sounds like the >> > best term to use here. >> >> Would InhibitRestartExitStatus= work for you? Something feels wrong with >> Dont* (partly because "don't" is a contraction of "do not" and >> DoNotRestartExitStatus just feels wrong too). >> >> Not sure if "Inhibit*" is maybe used somewhere already that would make >> this less desirable tho'. > > Hmm, using the word "inhibit" in this context might be confusing, since > we already have this suspend/shutdown inibition framework and tools like > "systemd-inhibit", which are unrelated to this. > > But what about "Prevent"? > > PreventRestartExitStatus= makes a lot of sense to me, but then again, I > am not a native speaker... Does that sound good to you, too?
Starting key names with verbs or attributes is a mess. If it's really bound to Restart, it should probably be RestartIgnoreExitStatus or something like that instead. Kay _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
