Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487665 --- Comment #12 from Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-05 13:27:06 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) > > All it does is create an obfuscation/abstraction layer between udev rules and > > its own configuration. > > It was designed as framework for multiple services, however it is configured > only for one service now and sad to say I don't know about any other common > service it could be used for. Right, but it's still a one-way abstraction, even if it's for other services - you can accomplish the same just by adding an upstart event and a udev rule, without having the soud conf file in between. > > So, for both the 'normal' boot cases, it adds code and complication to the boot > > process, without much benefit. > > Benefit should be for running system. Service need not run whole time but only > in case when hardware is present or switched on and user need not to care about > it. While it may make the service not run if you disable the hardware, it does it in a way that actually *increases* the boot time. I don't think that's how we want to go about it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review