From owner-freebsd-current Sun Feb 7 13:51:23 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA19992 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 13:51:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (castles235.castles.com [208.214.165.235]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA19981 for ; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 13:51:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA07576; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 13:46:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199902072146.NAA07576@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Matthew Dillon cc: Mike Smith , Andreas Klemm , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: some woes about rc.conf.site In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 07 Feb 1999 13:16:28 PST." <199902072116.NAA26516@apollo.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 07 Feb 1999 13:46:46 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > :> > :> What do you think ? Or what are your experiences ? > : > :I hate it unreservedly. If we need a source of seeded default values, > :we should have rc.conf.default, uncommented, read-only. rc.conf is > :where people expect to make their changes, and it is immensely bogus to > :have sysinstall creating rc.conf.site which is quietly included *after* > :everything in rc.conf (so that when someone changes rc.conf, the change > :is overridden). > : > :-- > > My opinion is that since we have /etc/rc and /etc/rc.local, we might > as well use /etc/rc.conf and /etc/rc.conf.local the same way -- that > is, just as /etc/rc should not be touched by anyone, neither should > /etc/rc.conf be touched by anyone. We have a system-wide convention that *.conf files are parameter files which are to be edited by the administrator. rc.conf is the configuration file for the rc* process. It is not to be confused with the other rc.* files. > sysinstall ( and any other GUI configurator ) should mess with > /etc/rc.conf.site No. > The user messes with /etc/rc.conf.local And no again. You've just introduced an impossible layering problem here; auto-configurator or administrator - who has precedence? If you want more layering, add it yourself, in the file that's meant for adjustment. The fundamental problem here is that rc.conf.site is an unnecessary violation of our established conventions as well as POLA. > Perhaps the problem is that we are simply naming these things badly. > Frankly, I would rather get rid of rc.conf.site entirely and just leave > rc.conf and rc.conf.local -- and have sysinstall mess with rc.conf.local. That's no better. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message