From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dux3k-00057g-Fq for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 18:43:16 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j6JIfAnD008258; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 18:41:10 GMT Received: from smtp04.gnvlscdb.sys.nuvox.net (smtp.nuvox.net [64.89.70.9]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6JId8Yd018332 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 18:39:09 GMT Received: from cgianelloni.nuvox.net (216.215.202.4.nw.nuvox.net [216.215.202.4]) by smtp04.gnvlscdb.sys.nuvox.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j6JIee3d005751 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:40:43 -0400 Received: by cgianelloni.nuvox.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:40:02 -0400 Subject: RE: [gentoo-dev] init script guidelines From: Chris Gianelloni To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <16CC9569DA3E4D41A1D4BC25D7B5A16A473AC6@hercules.magbank.com> References: <16CC9569DA3E4D41A1D4BC25D7B5A16A473AC6@hercules.magbank.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-/+s+xUFAOleYjpRFvMms" Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:40:01 -0400 Message-Id: <1121798402.26224.14.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 X-Archives-Salt: d346c7e1-f1d1-4a3e-9aac-1b8ed764af9c X-Archives-Hash: e1fce1f0e350cac6981af765fbee502c --=-/+s+xUFAOleYjpRFvMms Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 14:08 -0400, Eric Brown wrote: > My point is that Snort and Apache are not alone in this, so I suppose > quite a few upstream developers just disagree with us on what proper > initialization means. Why should our users suffer? They shouldn't, but that doesn't mean implementing some half-baked hack to resolve the situation. It might be better to instead patch the daemon in question and send the patches upstream. Upstream developers (usually) are much more willing to make changes when you've done the work for them... ;] --=20 Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux --=-/+s+xUFAOleYjpRFvMms Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBC3UkBkT4lNIS36YERAm+JAKC/mB6IFvOfa15hgt9GXouCYacRFwCfYnWG +0LVgk6qU+LAPY+Q5oUvM2w= =IVT7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-/+s+xUFAOleYjpRFvMms-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list