Re: PROPOSAL: init file actions (draft 2)
Alan Cox <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> We should define return codes as appropriate not strings. This is
> English centric.
For starters, how about:
0: no error
1: generic or unspecified error (already in use)
2: invalid argument(s)
3: unimplemented feature (for example, "reload")
4: user had insufficient privilege
5: program is not installed
6: program is not configured
And reserve the rest of the lower numbers for future LSB use, as well
as numbers for application-specific and distribution-specific use.
>> All error messages should be printed on standard error. All status
>> messages should be printed on standard output.
> Each distribution has a distinctive format. It would still be right IMHO
> to provide shell functions for error/warning etc that cant be used so the
> script added looks like the vendor native form.
Yes on the distinctive format. Shell functions would be good. But,
you're not disagreeing that errors should go to stderr and non-errors
should go to stdout, are you?