Re: rfkill(8) move and improvements

[Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:23:12PM +0100, Sami Kerola wrote:
> On 29 June 2017 at 15:04, Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> >> The otherday I ran powertop and it did rfkill to save battery, which
> >> was particularly annoying because I had not installed rfkill(8)
> >> package.
> >> Fixing the immediate issue was relatively easy, but the ordeal made
> >> me wonder if this tool could be moved to a package that is installed
> >> by default to all systems, such as util-linux.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> What do you think, would the move and proposed updates be ok?
> >
> > I can't say I mind, and most of your proposed changes seem sensible,
> > though I haven't reviewed them in enough detail to comment on them.
> > Something that caught my eye here was comparing a string to _("all")
> > which seems wrong, since that'd mean you'd have to type the translated
> > version even on the command line? That seems really awkward (to put it
> > charitably).
> >
> > However, at the same time, I have very little desire to get involved
> > with util-linux as yet another project, so frankly I'd probably
> > continue to "maintain" the current rfkill tool - which really hasn't
> > changed in a very long time, and hope somebody else picks up
> > maintenance of rfkill included in util-linux.
> 
> Hello Johannes,
> 
> Thank you for feedback. I removed the rfkill command strings from
> translations, and gave hint to translators how to deal with them in
> usage() output. Also in same go updates are rebased on top of
> most recent upstream to get usage() --help and --version handling
> done correctly.
> 
> What comes  to maintenance I am fairly optimistic util-linux is a
> good home for the rfkill. Karel, what do you think?

I have no problem with it, if Johannes agree with this step. We have
definitely manpower to maintain it.

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com