From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 26 14:53:30 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA05351 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 26 Nov 1996 14:53:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA05337 for ; Tue, 26 Nov 1996 14:53:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from brasil.moneng.mei.com (brasil.moneng.mei.com [151.186.109.160]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id OAA13999 for ; Tue, 26 Nov 1996 14:36:40 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jgreco@localhost) by brasil.moneng.mei.com (8.7.Beta.1/8.7.Beta.1) id QAA17750; Tue, 26 Nov 1996 16:34:26 -0600 From: Joe Greco Message-Id: <199611262234.QAA17750@brasil.moneng.mei.com> Subject: Re: Replacing sendmail To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 16:34:25 -0600 (CST) Cc: peter@taronga.com, bmk@fta.com, jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, brantk@atlas.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <13469.849034313@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Nov 26, 96 10:51:53 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Not in this particular set of examples, no, but understand that > services have many more options *other* than security which you'd also > eventually want to fold into the same mechanism. To contrive more examples: > > mail_control -fast_queue_depth 10 > mail_control -bounce_warnings no > mail_control -add-virtual "fred sfred@scurvy.com" > > lp_control -polled-mode > lp_control -set-type HP500C > > All of which might be reasonable things to want if you were intending > to write a more robust front-end for a variety of service options. > > Think "big picture", guys. :-) That's a nice big picture, I agree, but I am not talking about configuration of packages. That might very WELL be addressed through a mechanism like what you are describing! I am more interested in the MANAGEMENT of packages, i.e., is a particular package available and/or enabled? That is a higher level ("bigger picture" ;-) ) question than configuration particulars. CONFIGURATION of packages is a problem as well. I am not sure that it is wise to try to solve both problems with the same tool, but am certainly willing to discuss it if you believe that it is (I will tell you now: I have a preconceived notion that it is not a good idea). ... JG