bug in acpi/udev integration

[Shea690901]

Describe the bug
For acpi events (ac_adaptor|battery|button[ /]lid).* three different scripts are called.
Each of these scripts calls /lib/udev/lmt-udev without any argument, effectively doing the same.

The called udev script, when not getting "auto" as it's first argument always, regardless of running on a system using systemd or not, uses the internal function non_systemd_way, here again without any argument, and this function itself then calls /usr/sbin/laptop_mode, still without any arguments....

When called via udev rules it isn't much better:
Here we have 2 rules which on a systemd-system reload-or-restart laptop-mode.service and 1 rule regardless of the used init-system calling /usr/sbin/laptop_mode "force".
If we have no /lib/udev/hotplug.functions we might get an error message that force did not appear before the timeout! if /usr/sbin/laptop_mode can't be found within 120s, when called via acpid the same error message would be missing the word "force".

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
Install laptop-mode-tools.
Checked for version 1.74.

Expected behavior
A correct and logical integration with both acpid and udevd and not just working (is it even completely working?) by mistake....

Screenshots
Just take a close look at the supplied scripts....

Important Information:

• Distribution
  each using vanilla sources
• Laptop Mode Tools version 1.74, perhaps earlier too, not checked...

[rickysarraf]

What erratic behavior did you see in action ? Maybe some real logs will help ascertain your cause.

It has been working fine for me and many more users. This is the first report contradicting the impression otherwise.

[Shea690901]

Sorry for the long delay, problems in setting up my new machine....

As I wrote:
It might work accidently, but if all is working as expected, according the code, it IS accidently...
Please just take a CLOSE look at the code as I described in my report and not just read what you WANT done, but what is actual done, just as I described.
Everything is doing the same...
That might be what you want to do, but in that case the code volume could be halved without any problems....