From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Mar 15 14:46: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDAB637BC8E for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 14:46:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA11779 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 23:48:25 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id XAA14437 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 23:45:50 +0100 (MET) Received: from sr14.nsw-remote.bigpond.net.au (sr14.nsw-remote.bigpond.net.au [24.192.3.29]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86CC837C053 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 14:44:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from areilly@nsw.bigpond.net.au) Received: from areilly.bpc-users.org (CPE-144-132-171-71.nsw.bigpond.net.au [144.132.171.71]) by sr14.nsw-remote.bigpond.net.au (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA10235 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2000 09:44:17 +1100 (EDT) Received: (qmail 86779 invoked by uid 1000); 15 Mar 2000 22:44:16 -0000 From: "Andrew Reilly" Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 09:44:16 +1100 To: Thomas Stromberg Cc: Yoshinobu Inoue , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Time for an /etc/ipv6 directory? (restructure /etc?) Message-ID: <20000316094416.A84559@gurney.reilly.home> References: <20000315130310N.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 01:09:23PM -0500, Thomas Stromberg wrote: > Should we go the same route? Should we symlink our /etc directory to all > hell and back, or screw backwards compatibility? What is our > direction. I'm not advocating any of the ideas above, I just want to give > everyone a little food for thought. Many questions need to be answered. I think that symlink farms are a bad idea, and in this case they defeat the only purpose that increasing the depth of the /etc hierarchy could serve. > Directory organization is something which is always a topic for argument, > because everyone seems to have their own idea and be passionate about > it. As far as myself, I don't really care, as long as /etc is only for > config files :0 I'd like to see /etc eventually be replaced by a portal file system accessing a configuration database (maybe in LDAP). But I'm just saying that to be argumentative. -- Andrew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message