Re: /usr/etc and /usr/local/etc?
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> writes:
> goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de wrote:
> >
> > The problem is that NIS does not work, crashes, fills a lot of garbage
> > int /var/log until linux crashes, has strange behaviour and is pretty
> > useless for a pool of diskless maschines.
>
> Really? I personally have had no such bad experience with NIS. Would you to
> care to file a few bug reports?
I had this problem with various suse systems and once with a Debian
System and thus I never used it again. I don´t know about the current
status of NIS, but I had bad experience.
> > Think about a pool of 100 diskless terminals all having a copy of
> > /etc/resolve.conf and many other files in etc. Now consider changing
> > the nameserver for the terminals. Its a problem of space and
> > administrativ work that makes me want a /usr/etc or
> > /etc/share. At the moment one has to copy the shareable files to
> > /etc/share and symlink them in /etc.
>
> No, this is what NIS is for.
How does it work when all those files are on one server? I think
having only one file and symlink all others against that (maybe even
hardlinks) is easier and takes less space.
With /etc/share the problem wouldn´t arise, since all terminals would
have the same /etc/share and changing /etc/share/foobar on the server
would result in an imediate change on all terminals.
My personal opinion is: "What can be shared should be shared". Of
cause one can allways share more in a individual setup, but some
things can be shared on a general scale.
May the Source be with you.
Goswin
Reply to: