Once upon a time, Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com> said:
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:57:13AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Matthew Garrett <mjg59(a)srcf.ucam.org> said:
> > No package should be automatically changing the sysrq policy.
>
> Why not?
>
> For example, I use a commercial backup program that makes extensive use
> of IPC and needs the msgmni and msgmnb limits raised beyond the default
> values. Why shouldn't they be able to include that change in their RPM?
What happens if two packages want to set a sysctl to different values ?
Well, that's already a possibility with lots of the ".d" type solutions,
so I don't see why sysctl.d is any different.
--
Chris Adams <cmadams(a)hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.