On Sun, 1 Sep 1996, Glenn Bily wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> > >> If /usr/local is really for local configuration then it >shouldn't be in
> > >> /usr.
> >
> > >Yes. It should probably be a symlink to somewhere else out >of the box
> > >on a freshly-installed Debian system. The installation >scripts can do
> > >that. Please submit a bug report on the "boot-floppies" >package about
> > >this so I won't forget it. The info on how to use the bug >system is
> > >on our web page www.debian.org .
>
> If it is suppose to be empty...Then why should it be at all?
Hmmm, i tend to agree here, except if Debian doesn't put it
there, I'm sure a slew of newbies will never figure out
where to put home grown stuff. Perhaps creating
/usr/local/{bin,include,lib,man} and a README file explaning
what the heck it all is.
>
> > >> /local/etc would be configuration files typically found >/etc.
> >
> > >/etc is by definition local - however I have done it exactly >as you
> > describe on my system (before upgrading with dpkg >became so easy) in
> > order to tell what I had changed. I've >actually thought about using a
> > source control system
> > >(like RCS) on /etc . "dpkg" doesn't currently know how to >check
> > control files in and out of RCS - is this a good idea? >Currently, it
> > will leave a "filename.dpkg-new" file around >for you to hand-edit if
> > you decline to over-write a control >file.
No point in splitting hairs, etc is local already. When we
start to over scrutinize things to this extent, we need to
ask ourselves what it it we really want to accomplish.
Doesn't /etc/ already accomplish this? As far as using rcs,
I think its a good idea, but does it break some other
packages that offer a method for controlling and
distributing this information? Maybe using /var/lib/RCS or
something and keeping this stuff unlocked. That would give
dpkg the opportunity to have its own version information,
without encumbering other utilities.
>
> The difference between local configuration and global configuration is
> vague. A good way to determine this would be: If I NFS mount /etc
>
> If one wanted to give the installer a choice (wonderful!) then shell
> script could be lifted out of the kernel configuration utility. The type
> of choice code that could be used has already been written.
you lost me here.
>
> > There should also be a dpkg flag to ask it if you have altered a control
> > file from the version in the package. Since it keeps the md5 checksum
> > around, that is possible.
If it keeps the md5sum around, can't it detect alterations?
>
> The fact you find need to edit this script suggest problems (to be
> distinuish from /etc/X11/xdm/xdm-config which is a genuine configuration
> file). One should be able to get away with only editing these scripts
> once or twice in a blue moon. The rests of this work should be done in
> ~/.Xsession as a regular user.
> It should be the perogative of any Unix system to keep users out of root
> as much as possible.
I've never had the need to let any user muck around in the
root filesystem for any reason on any flavor on UNIX. I'm
not sure I'm following this last part either ...
Thanks
Richard G. Roberto
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
201-739-2886 - whippany, nj
--
*******************************************************************************
Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or
agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account
activity contained in this communication.
*******************************************************************************
