Subject: Re: [PATCH] new option BEEP_ONHALT_FOREVER
To: Jachym Holecek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
Date: 05/21/2006 00:10:30
On 5/20/06, Jachym Holecek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> # Julio M. Merino Vidal 2006-05-20:
> > On 5/20/06, M=E1ty=E1s J=E1nos <email@example.com> wrote:
> > >On Sat, 20 May 2006 19:57:13 +0200
> > >Quentin Garnier <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'd rather see this implemented as BEEP_ONHALT_COUNT =3D=3D -1 (or m=
> > >> 0) than adding yet another option on the subject. It will make the
> > >> patch (and documentation) much simpler and clearer.
> > >
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >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"
Except that users that do not want to rebuild the kernel will not be
able to ever access this feature. This was already discussed.
Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
The Julipedia - http://julipedia.blogspot.com/