Re: What do I use to reconfigure the network /after/ initial install on Etch?
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:47:00 +0100
Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Celejar wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:50:41 +0100
> > Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> You want vi? change /etc/prefereces/editor to symlink vi and then visudo
> >
> > '/etc/alternatives'
>
> Oops. I don't use it so I don't know it's name. Sorry about that.
> >
> >> will run vi.
> >>
> >> I suppose one should use update-preferences to do that, but that's one
> >
> > 'update-alternatives'
> >
> >> of the "tools" that hide how things really work. Just like editing the
> >> /etc/network/interfaces compared to running a tool to edit it for you.
> >>
> >> Again, one of the reasons I switched to Debian is so I didn't have all
> >> these fancy little tools. Everything is stored in text files that can
> >> be edited with one's favorite editor. That's the way it is, and that's
> >> the way it should stay.
> >
> > I disagree with you about using update-alternatives. That is the
> > 'official' way of manipulating the alt. system. The README in /etc/alt.
> > sends you to the update-alt manpage, and update-alt does more than just
> > manipulating that one symlink. For example (from the manpage):
[snipped manpage quote]
> > Also:
> >
> >> Since the activities of update-alternatives are quite involved, some
> >> specific terms will help to explain its operation.
> >
>
> That may be true for some things, but IMO, not for everything.
Agreed. I was referring specifically to update-alt, as above.
[snip]
> Celejar, let me ask you this, is it better to edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf by
> hand to implement necessary changes or should one use dpkg-reconfigure
> xserver-xorg exclusively to build that file?
I try to use dpkg-reconfigure so that when the file is updated, I won't
need to redo my changes. Sometimes, however, I have no choice since I
want to do something that d-r doesn't seem to want to do.
> What is the point of having all info stored in plain text files if one
> is supposed to only use tools to edit them? They might as well be
> binary. Or is it perhaps so other tools can easily read them?
Others have made good points about this.
In general, I think the question of whether to edit manually or use a
tool depends on the situation, as also discussed in the various posts
in this thread. The original topic of the thread was
'/etc/network/interfaces', which I have always edited by hand.
Networking is tricky enough without an automaton trying to make things
'easier' for you (how many people have been messed up by
'zeroconf'?) ... Additionally, it's important to have a good, detailed
understanding of your network configuration or you *will* run into
trouble down the road (you probably will anyway, but it'll be much
worse and much more frustrating if you don't really understand your net
setup), and that understanding is best acquired, IMO, by manual setup.
Celejar
Reply to: