On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 12:31:19PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote: > gconftool-2 already exists you can do this already; just write a small > shell script, gpm-set-governor or whatever, and it'll already work. I > can't speak for Richard but if we do this thing of making g-p-m run in > the unusual cases when no-one is logged in, I'm pretty damn sure he I think calling this an "unusual case" is the root cause of the difference in viewpoints here. > gconf or whatever. The price you pay? Maybe you'll have to use dedicated > command line tools instead of editing a file in /etc. Understand that > we, the developers of these bits, are actually trying to reach out and > make it easier for system administrators like yourself. Both sides gotta > give a little. I *do* appreciate your development work on this. I just want to help you understand an important segment of the "we" you mentioned before. This way of doing things isn't merely old-fashioned -- it's got concrete advantages which continue to be important to Linux as it moves forward. I don't mind using dedicated command line tools to accomplish tasks -- I'm fine with using chkconfig to manipulate runlevels, for example -- but the problem with adding a bunch more of these sorts of thing is that each one has its own new interface to learn (and relearn if you only do it infrequently). A key=value config file, on the other hand, can be understood immediately (particularly with decent comments). And, you can fix it with any old rescue environment -- no need for fancy tools. In the real world, that's *huge*. -- Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://mattdm.org/> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/> -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
