Re: Some ideas about the text db
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Some ideas about the text db
- From: David Frey <email@example.com>
- Date: Sun, 08 Jun 1997 15:19:53 +0200
- Message-id: <m0wahtH-000AHSC@eos>
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 08 Jun 1997 10:37:18 BST." <Pine.LNX.3.95.970608103404.2655Afirstname.lastname@example.org>
> Basically, we first have a "/default" directory, which every package
> imports its default settings into.
> User configuration is put under "/config", which means that the system
> will first look under /config, then /default when a variable is requested.
I don't see the advantage of this scheme. Please explain why it is
favorable to have 2 configuration trees.
If you wan't to have 2 trees, a better and easier approach is to have
(standard Unix-way) a $HOME/.config/... and a /etc/config/... tree.
But the question is, whether you want to use the configuration database
for all and everything (-> each user wants his/her own copy)
or just for system-related entries (one global /etc/config is enough).
David Frey |Linux --- the choice of a GNU generation!
51F35923114FC8647D05FF173C61EFDE|GE C++ UL+++ P- W-- !w--- PGP++ t@++ R D---
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .