> > Anyway there is demand for such a mechanism (the threads on this and
> > bugzillas are witnesses), and there will always be, so let's better
> > think on how and not why.
>
> there is always demand for mechanisms that work around bugs. Doesn't
> mean that it's the right thing to not fix the bug but do the workaround
> instead; simply because it means the bug probably won't get fixed.
Indeed. Just to make sure I'm being clear, I'm *not* advocating that we
have rc.modules.d . I'm trying to make sure we don't add one without
giving it well defined ordering semantics, because I think that'd be a
colossal mistake.
In general, I think Pete's right -- for things with devices, hald and
friends should be choosing what how the devices are exposed to the rest
of the userland.
For things that don't present devices, that's a different story, but in
general I think they have less need to be dropped into place by non-Core
packages. Unfortunately, that's not "no need", but I don't know that
it's enough to justify adding such a broad, generic mechanism.
--
Peter
