In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
email@example.com (Jules Bean) writes:
> --On Sat, May 30, 1998 7:02 pm +0000 "Rev. Joseph Carter"
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 29, 1998 at 09:13:01AM -0500, John Goerzen Linux Expo Laptop
>>> > I hope to get a closer look at linuxconf soon. Based on what I have
>>> What really got me impressed was that it does not use its own database --
>> it groks the REAL config files for each program. This, I think,
> FWIW, last time I thought about this problem, I did come up with a solution.
> If we were to move to a database-based configuration set-up (which is
> probably a Good Thing), then we could easily make it backward compatible by
> creating an etcfs filesystem, mounted as /psuedoetc or some such,
> (conceptually a bit like /proc) which has drivers which make it appear to
> contain config files of the format programs expect to read - except that
> they are dynamically generated from the underlying database, and don't
> really exist.
Thats fine. At least until the day I have to boot my system from a rescue
disk and then mount my root partition to fix a config problem. How am I
supposed to edit one of these non-existent /pseudoetc files on my root
> Potential advantages of this system are the ability to have linked tables in
> the database, so that you only have to update one item, your FQDN, and you
> can expect your exim.conf, your apache/httpd.conf and your hosts file all to
> stay in sync.
Another potential advantage to "such a 'registry' system" could be the
occasional "Windows-like" registry corruption.
||k || Steve Kostecke | Debian GNU/Linux
||__|| email@example.com | The OpenSource Operating System
|/__\| http://kostecke.home.ml.org | http://www.debian.org
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com