On 10/04/2010 13:11, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 03:18:42 -0700 > Garrett Cooper <yanef...@gmail.com> wrote: >> FWIW, I've thought this over and and user modifiable scripts should >> not be in packages; they should instead be example files which don't >> conflict with real configuration files. This is already the case for >> several ports, but not all ports. If we did this, it would solve the >> problem we've had with ports removing or overwriting user config files >> simply and easily. I wonder if other folks agree with me or not. >> > > I agree as long as the port emits a message pointing the user at the > example configuration files.
I think noone ever agreed that installing user changeable configuration files was a good idea and .sample files or include folders are both prominent and widely accepted solutions. However this only ever entered the discussion because of a misunderstanding. I'd prefer to keep the discussion on topic and avoid the million "I agree" posts on something no one ever disagreed to. Regards -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
