Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 18:05:15 +0100 From: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: some woes about rc.conf.site Message-ID: <19990207180515.A92395@titan.klemm.gtn.com> In-Reply-To: <11940.918404997@zippy.cdrom.com>; from Jordan K. Hubbard on Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 08:29:57AM -0800 References: <19990207170542.A90515@titan.klemm.gtn.com> <11940.918404997@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 08:29:57AM -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > Sorry to say this, but after having to use rc.conf.site as it is now > > I really kind of 'hate' it. > > Sorry to say this, but you really don't understand it. :) What ????? ;-) Don't tell me that ;-) > > When we had one central rc.conf file it was fun to browse through > > it and having all supported knobs visible at a glance. > > And you still have this now. In fact, with the unadulterated rc.conf, you > have the original "default" values for youre reference. Yes, true, but with the new concept of leaving this file untouched and only altering rc.conf.site I have the overhead as described in my mail. I have to choose things in rc.conf, but to change it in a different file. Browing and changing in one file (rc.conf) was easier for me. Well, my private workaround is now to remove rc.conf.site. > > Then rc.conf.site has a totally different sort order which is > > not very helpful/comfortable, when comparing rc.conf and rc.conf.site. > > Well now that much is true - I suppose I could sort it, or something. Would be fine, if it would have the same sortorder as rc.conf. This would make it easier to browse through both files in two windows. > > Then rc.conf.site doesn't contain every knob which rc.conf has. > > Erm, it's not supposed to. It's supposed to contain only those knobs > you want to change. Are we even talking about a 3.0/4.0 snapshot made > after 99/2/5 23:00 PST? I did send email out about this. Well I speak of a SNAPSHOT I made myself and I followed the discussion and found the idea nice. But now when having to edit rc.conf.site manually with vi, I have the feeling, that this concept sucks a bit. It's ok, if you always use the user interface (sysinstall). But if you want to fine tune system settings by hand with vi it has the overhead I descripbed in my previous e-mail: And that actually is: you have always to compare rc.conf and rc.conf.site if you want to add or modify a feature. Or you simply copy rc.conf over rc.conf.site and start over. > > Well, maybe I overlooked some things advantages ;-) Then please tell me. > > As usual, I think you're just out of date and we're not even talking about > current technology. :) Hmmm, I think your answer is a bit political, or am I really the only person, who hacks rc.conf.site with vi and has to browse through both files at the same time and is a bit annoyed by having to compare every single line and then to add the knob in rc.conf.site ?! Well browsing and modifying only one file (rc.conf) at the same time was a lot more comfortable for me. But, if I'm the only person who complains, then forget about it. It's not sooooo important then ;-) Andreas /// -- Andreas Klemm http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~andreas What gives you 90% more speed, for example, in kernel compilation ? http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~fsmp/SMP/akgraph-a/graph1.html "NT = Not Today" (Maggie Biggs) ``powered by FreeBSD SMP'' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990207180515.A92395>