On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:47:37 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "more robust against leaving daemon's around for some reason", etc.
> 
> Not sure I agree with this.

I'm sorry. I wasn't clear.

I wasn't advocating one solution over the other. I was just giving an
example of the kind of technical merits on which I would like to see the
approaches evaluated.

I care about the robustness of the approach here. I'm less inclined to
care about the "messiness" of the implementation (however that is
measured).

If both approaches are equally robust, then I'll take your word for it,
and that's great.

-Carl

-- 
carl.d.worth@intel.com