Re: Linuxconf
On Fri, 10 Jan 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
>
> On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Shaya Potter wrote:
>
> > > the biggest problem with linuxconf is that it replaces sysvinit.
> > > Linuxconf has some really nice features and seems like a
> > > comprehensive configuration system BUT even if it was 10 times as
> > > good it still wouldnt be worth losing sysvinit.
> >
> > What I was proposing on debian-devel would mean you can have both.
> > The linuxconf dropins would point toward the /etc/init.d scripts and
> > when each package configures itself just like it calls update-rc.d
> > now it could call a "configure" program.
>
> that's partly missing the point. init and linuxconf fulfil two separate
> functions.
>
> configuration of a system and/or it's applications is an almost
> completely separate function to controlling what daemons get started and
> when.
I would personally like that to be the case too, (and if I had the
ability to write a program like linuxconf I would have written it that
way). However, I didn't write it, but I still think it is the best tool
for configuring a linux system and with minimal work can be made to work
with debian.
>
> I really don't want my system automatically restarting some important
> daemon just because i've touched it's config file - if i want it
> restarted then it's up to me to take some action which forces it to
> happen.
I agree with that and that is why we don't need to have linuxconf use the
monitor lines in the dropins.
>
> here's a good example of why: squid. when it restarts, it can take
> literally hours (depending on the size of the object cache it's
> managing) for it to completely read in it's log file and know what
> objects are already cached. This isn't a big issue if you're only
> caching 50 or 100mb of web traffic, but is a huge issue if your proxy
> machine has 4 or 8 or 20 GB of disk space dedicated to the task. I need
> to be able to edit squid's conf file at any time and schedule a restart
> for a time that suits me and the users dependant on it.
I understand, but even if you wanted it to restart automatically, all it
would take is editing a single line in the dropin
>
> Also, there are other daemons and processes which rely on important
> state-dependant information which will be lost when they are terminated
> and restarted. Having that happen automatically whenever a config file
> is touched strikes me as being not only inflexible, but also potentially
> dangerous. i don't want my system second-guessing me.
>
Again, don't have to have a monitor line.
>
> i'd be a lot more inclined to like linuxconf if it confined itself to
> managing configuration information and left init's job to init....and
> left my job to me.
I agree with you first point, but we can easily make linuxconf let you do
your job.
>
> A configuration engine's job is to make it easier to configure and
> use EXISTING configuration methods, not to force everything into it's
> mold. In other words, it has to maintain continuity with established
> standards.
>
It does mostly, however I do know the init issue is a big issue. I might
talk to the linuxconf developer to see if we can get it better
intergrated with init.
Shaya
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: