"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Okay, here's one: most Unix systems store all of the configuration > > files in a well known directory: /etc. These days it's a hierarchy of > > directories with /etc as the root of the hierarchy. When an > > administrator is looking for configuration files, the first place he's > > going to look is in /etc and its subdirectories.
> No goddammit - /usr/local/etc. Why can't the Linux community respect > history!!!! > > It is the ONE TRUE PLACE dammit!!! Well, to the extent that you're serious, you understand that a lot of people feel that /usr/local should be reserved for stuff that's installed by the local sysadmin, and your vendor/distro isn't supposed to be messing with it. Which means if the the vendor installed Postgresql (say, the Red Hat Database) you'd expect config files to be in /etc. If the postgresql is compiled from source by local admin, you might look somewhere in /usr/local. I've got the vauge feeling that this is all more than a little silly... directory locations floating about depending on who did what, as thought it were such a radical thing to do a ./configure, make & make install. But this is a pretty common feeling among the unix world (more wide spread than just in the Linux world). ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
