Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:32:06 -0000 From: paul@originative.co.uk To: chris@netmonger.net, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: was: some woes about rc.conf.site Message-ID: <A6D02246E1ABD2119F5200C0F0303D10FE16@octopus>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Masto [mailto:chris@netmonger.net] > Sent: 07 February 1999 20:14 > To: current@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: was: some woes about rc.conf.site > > > I haven't used it yet, but I definately think the idea is an > improvement. I hate trying to update /etc after an upgrade.. if it's > been a while, or it's between major versions, it can take a very > significant amount of time. Anything that moves local changes to a > seperate file is a blessing. > > Also, having had sysinstall destroy my /etc/rc.conf on more than one > occasion, I am grateful to not have it touched any more. I don't understand what rc.conf.site buys us, surely sysinstall is just an admin tool for maintaining site specific options in exactly the same way that vi /etc/rc.conf.local would be? I think it's getting overly engineered and we're just chasing our tails. Why can't there be a set of shipped defaults, set in /usr/share that is never touched by local sites and by definition will always be up to date and then have a single file /etc/rc.conf that provides local overrides. Whether you maintain it with sysinstall or vi shouldn't really matter. Paul. 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?A6D02246E1ABD2119F5200C0F0303D10FE16>