> On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, jack wrote:
>
> > If /etc/rc.conf only contains changes from the defaults when
> > man something_or_other tells the user to find and edit
> > something_or_other_flags in /etc/rc.conf the entry won't be
> > there to edit.
>
> Why must it contain only changes? Is there any reason it
> couldn't be a copy of the default rc.conf on a new installation?
> Over time and upgrades it may get a little out of sync with the
> default file, but by then the user/admin will most likely be
> familiar enough with configuring the system that it won't exactly
> be a stumper.
>
> And how about this: stick a big comment at the top of
> /etc/rc.conf suggesting that the user consult
> /etc/defaults/rc.conf for a complete list of tunable parameters.
>
> Even in the worst case, the system behavior is exactly as it was
> before any of these changes came about.
Exactly !
I've got the equivalent of /etc/defaults/rc.conf in /usr/src/etc at
the moment. What have we gained ?
What are we trying to gain ?
The fundamental problem is not going to go away. When people upgrade,
whether it's via ``make install'' or via sysinstall, they're still
going to have to hand-install /etc, maybe with some help from
mergemaster or a local script. If they don't, they'll be burned by
a changed default value. What we've got now in -current is a place
to put default variable values rather than having to make /etc/rc*
behave reasonably if /etc/rc.conf isn't updated... not much of a gain
IMHO.
As long as the /etc/rc* files don't complain if /etc/defaults
doesn't exist, i'll be happy. It's a waste of space when you've
got /usr/src, and only confuses things.
> -john
--
Brian <br...@awfulhak.org> <br...@freebsd.org> <br...@openbsd.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
