On Tue, 06 Dec 2016 13:06:35 -0600, Tim Chase wrote: > On 2016-12-06 12:10, Wildman via Python-list wrote: >> If I had tried this in the beginning, it would have >> save you a lot of work. >> >> Since both versions of the code works, which one do >> you recommend? Or does it matter? > > Heh, I'm not sure it matters much. The code I provided should be > expandable for tidily handling other entries in utmp, allowing you to > search for other system events that might interest you (check out the > invocation of the filter() function which filters by type).
Yes, your code is very expandable and I will keep it archived for that reason. In the future I might want to delve further into utmp. But right now all I need is the runlevel. > Since I've already done the leg-work, I mildly advocate using my > version since it should be pretty clean and easy to expand. But if > you want the satisfaction of using your code, I won't take offense :-) > > -tkc Yes, I think I will use my code. No offense intended. :-) Again, I do appreciate all your work on my behalf. I hope some day I can return the favor. -- <Wildman> GNU/Linux user #557453 The cow died so I don't need your bull! -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
