Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:24:56 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> Cc: des@des.no, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, gad@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: "Chatty" config files in /etc Message-ID: <20060830192456.2497b4bd.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060830202834.GA11284@rambler-co.ru> References: <200608290920.k7T9KmV9067843@repoman.freebsd.org> <86zmdmfoow.fsf@dwp.des.no> <p0623091cc11b704fff62@[128.113.24.47]> <20060830202834.GA11284@rambler-co.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:28:34 +0400 Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 01:41:51PM -0400, Garance A Drosehn wrote: > > [perhaps this should be continued on freebsd-arch?] > > > I think this is too simple material for freebsd-arch. :-) > > > At 1:27 PM +0200 8/30/06, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > > >> Modified files: > > >> etc hosts.allow > > >> Log: > > > > Comment out lines that use example addresses and example.com > > > > names so that local changes can be made more easily (without > > > > having to comment these lines, and making the diff more > > > > readable). > > > > > >That reminds me - /etc/hosts is another file that mergemaster often > > >trips over. The comments and examples it contains should be moved > > >to the appropriate man page(s) if they aren't there already. In > > >fact, we should probably remove the file from the tree, and just > > >have sysinstall create one at install time. > > > > I'm sure Ruslan didn't mean to open up this whole can of worms, > > but I also find files like /etc/hosts, /etc/hosts.allow, and > > /etc/pf.conf to be annoying when it comes to system upgrades. > > > Well, I'm happy to open it in (what seems to be) the right direction > since it also looks very annoying to me. > > > They're meant to be helpful, but they're so chatty with comments, > > and they are files that I *always* have to localize with my own > > changes. It is annoying when it seems like one of these files > > pop up in mergemaster every single time I upgrade, and it's > > almost always due to a change in some line that does not actually > > effect anything. I mean, I can understand it's useful to correct > > comments in the file, but my already-running system is not going > > to run any differently with the correct comment than the incorrect > > comment. > > > > I do think those comments and examples are useful, but it might be > > better to move those lines into separate files. We could move them > > into man pages, but then they won't be available on systems which > > have NO_MAN set. I also think that for these files, there is some > > advantage in having the info as plain-text files, and not all > > spruced up with nroff commands. I wonder if it would be better to > > have the comments and examples as files under /etc/defaults. I > > suppose they could also go under /usr/share/examples, but for these > > files I think there is some advantage that the comments and examples > > be on '/', and not on '/usr'. > > > > Also, if the comment+example files are under /etc/defaults, then > > changes to them *will* come up in mergemaster. It's just that > > now they will show up in a file that has no local changes, so > > the user can just read the change, instead of having to "merge" > > all their local changes with the new official version. > > > I think they should be moved to /usr/share/examples/etc/ (like > make.conf), with files in /etc/ representing good (short) defaults > with a minimum of comments and probably references to examples. > Like no /etc/hosts.allow file at all: > > """ > A non-existing access control file is treated as if it were an empty > file. Thus, access control can be turned off by providing no access > control files. > """ Question is, what files will be moved? All configuration files or just "some" ? -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060830192456.2497b4bd.trhodes>