[Nagiosplug-devel] [RFC] Plugins config file

[Gavin Carr]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 09:43:52AM +0100, Ton Voon wrote:
> On 18 Oct 2006, at 02:08, Gavin Carr wrote:
> >I'm not strongly opposed to something like this if people feel it's
> >significantly simpler. There are two main differences between this  
> >and what I proposed:

<snip>

> I'm coming round to the idea of the config file - it has been well  
> argued here.
> 
> I don't like the idea of having the "extra level of indirection" with  
> another set of "standard" parameters (Where are they defined? Why are  
> the different?). So, I think the ini file should just hold the  
> current options, but in a more secure/readable format.

I'm fine with this suggestion. For some reason I'd forgotten about long 
option names, which should usually be fine for disambiguating options. 

> Plugins that support this new config file parsing of options take the  
> option (as Sean suggested) of
> 
>   --extra-opts=[configfile][:stanzaname]

Syntax quibble: how about 'configfile#section', like URL fragments?
Colon is already used in host:/path/to/file forms, and in ranges.

> The [:stanzaname]  
> defines a stanza within the config file, otherwise defaults to name  
> of plugin (maybe reserve "main" as a stanza name - this config file  
> has given me some ideas for future stuff).
> 
> An example stanza:
> 
> [check_mysql]
> username=tonvoon
> password=secret
> 
> So running "check_mysql -S --extra-opts=" should give the same result  
> as running "check_mysql -S --username=tonvoon --password=secret". If  
> fact, the variable names could just be the short option form:
> 
> [check_mysql]
> u=tonvoon
> p=password
> 
> But I'm guessing using that long names will be preferred. 

And just to clarify: you're saying that where an argument has multiple
forms (even more than two), any of them would also be acceptable in 
the config file?

Cheers,
Gavin