[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Linuxconf

In article <[🔎] 320938.3105550397@jmlb2.trin.cam.ac.uk>,
	jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk (Jules Bean) writes:
> --On Sat, May 30, 1998 7:02 pm +0000 "Rev. Joseph Carter"
> <knghtbrd@earthlink.net> wrote: 
>> On Fri, May 29, 1998 at 09:13:01AM -0500, John Goerzen Linux Expo Laptop
> wrote:
>>> > 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
||__|| steve@kostecke.net            |  The OpenSource Operating System
|/__\| http://kostecke.home.ml.org   |  http://www.debian.org

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: