From owner-cvs-all Thu Feb 11 05:16:30 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA13993 for cvs-all-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 05:16:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from octopus.originative.co.uk (originat.demon.co.uk [158.152.220.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA13970; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 05:16:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from paul@originative.co.uk) From: paul@originative.co.uk Received: by octopus with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) id <1R49BBBP>; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:14:46 -0000 Message-ID: To: asami@FreeBSD.ORG, jkh@zippy.cdrom.com Cc: jkh@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: cvs commit: src/etc netstart pccard_ether rc rc.devfs rc.disk less2 rc.firewall Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:14:40 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > -----Original Message----- > From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG [mailto:asami@FreeBSD.ORG] > Sent: 11 February 1999 05:02 > To: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com > Cc: jkh@FreeBSD.org; cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org; cvs-all@FreeBSD.org > Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc netstart pccard_ether rc rc.devfs > rc.diskless2 rc.firewall > > > * > Wouldn't it be better to have an almost-empty > /etc/rc.conf pull in > * > /etc/defaults/rc.conf and /etc/rc.conf.local? That way users can > * > * Nope! If the user installs their old rc.conf from backup, > as they may > * have been doing for every upgrade previous to this one, it will > * destroy the linkage. We thought about this. :) > > Well, it would work for the variables that stayed the same, and not > for the ones that have changed. Which is exactly the same behavior > they would have gotten in the old paradigm if they splatted their own > /etc/rc.conf over the new one without examining the new one first. > (I'd say those people deserve whatever breakage it causes. ;) > > I still don't like the idea of the "defaults" file sourcing the > user-tunable file. It just doesn't sound...right. It won't work any other way, this way will actually work quite well. Think of it as a sort of object orientedness with the child i.e. the rc.conf file inheriting properties from the parent, the defaults file. The child can modify those properties that it wants but keep the inherited defaults for other properties. When the rc.conf file is sourced from the defaults file you're creating the child object. It's not OO in any real sense but it helps to visualise how it will all work when you think that way. Paul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message