Hi,
On 2018-03-01 13:04:35 -0500, Curt Tilmes wrote:
>On 2018-03-01 11:36:01 -0500, Curt Tilmes wrote:
>> > This is already pretty crufty, can't we make this look a bit prettier,
>> > rather than extending this approach?
>>
>> My goal was to match the surrounding code style, so I simply copied
>> existing lines.
Yea, I think you're definitely to blame here. But I think just
continuing on the same bad trend isn't a good idea ;)
>> Do you have any specific suggestions? Would it help if I separated
>> the new code into its own
>> subroutine?
>
> I broke the new directory search out into its own subroutine, so even
> less impact on existing code.
I do think that helps!
>> > So there's no really well defined order in which we parse these?
>>
>> These are after the existing homedir/sysconfdir, but yes, once we fall
>> down to the '.d' directory,
>> we just keep trying until we find the specified service, and fail if
>> we never find it.
And within the directory which service file wins will be decided by
filesystem internals. That makes me a bit uncomfortable, this very well
might not be stable. I think it might not be terrible idea to sort the
directory and process alphabetically?
>> > In my experience with such .conf.d directories it's very useful to
>> > filter names not matching a common pattern. Otherwise you end up with
>> > editor tempfiles and such being used, which gets confusing.
>>
>> Suggestions? I'll make it skip over files prefixed with '.'.
>> Anything else you suggest?
>
> New patch skips over '.' dotfiles.
I'd also insist that the file ending is ".conf".
Thanks for the quick update,
Andres Freund
