From: jason@perfinion.com (Jason Zaman) Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 16:40:45 +0400 Subject: [refpolicy] [PATCH] Introduce init_manage_service_template interface In-Reply-To: <555F21FE.8030006@tresys.com> References: <1431642524-14781-1-git-send-email-jason@perfinion.com> <5559E1D1.6090107@tresys.com> <20150518132133.GB22574@meriadoc.Home> <20150518141108.GA24890@meriadoc.Home> <555C85C8.3000704@tresys.com> <20150520134345.GA21598@meriadoc.Home> <555F21FE.8030006@tresys.com> Message-ID: <20150522124044.GA19425@meriadoc.Home> To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 08:33:02AM -0400, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote: > On 5/20/2015 9:43 AM, Jason Zaman wrote: > > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 09:02:00AM -0400, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote: > >> On 5/18/2015 10:11 AM, Jason Zaman wrote: > >>> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 03:27:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > >>>> What about "operate"? > >>> > >>> or direct, govern, handle. I think operate is a bit better tho since > >>> operator is one of the standard unix accounts. > >>> > >>> Chris, do you want me to re-do the patch with any of them in particular > >>> or do you want to search and replace on your end? > >> > >> I was thinking about verbs for these interfaces in general, and obvious > >> ones are: > >> > >> * start > >> * stop > >> * > >> > >> Then it occurred to me, why not do something like startstop like we do > >> sendrecv? It's ugly, but clearly indicates what is happening. > > > > That makes a lot of sense and would not have any misunderstandings. It's > > not really that ugly apart from init_startstop_service_template is pretty > > long. Do we need / want the _template in it? > > It's not actually creating any types, thus it's not technically a > template, so you can skip the _template. okay, i'll change it to init_startstop_service() and re-run the tests and send the patches in a bit. Thanks, Jason