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
