Subject: Re: [PATCH] new option BEEP_ONHALT_FOREVER
To: Julio M. Merino Vidal <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jachym Holecek <email@example.com>
Date: 05/20/2006 23:59:21
# Julio M. Merino Vidal 2006-05-20:
> On 5/20/06, Mátyás János <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >On Sat, 20 May 2006 19:57:13 +0200
> >Quentin Garnier <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> I'd rather see this implemented as BEEP_ONHALT_COUNT == -1 (or maybe
> >> 0) than adding yet another option on the subject. It will make the
> >> patch (and documentation) much simpler and clearer.
> >I think you are right. Here comes the simplified version.
> I think it'd be better if the check against -1 was done at run time
> rather than during build time. Ideally, this functionality could be
> configured through sysctl (I wanted to do it, but haven't had the time
> yet) and, in that situation, it needs to be checked at run time to
> work properly.
A sysctl sounds like overkill to me -- this is typical "set once"