Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 02:06:38PM +0200, Roland Mainz wrote: > > If this causes problems the admins can edit the machine-/site-wide > > files. Even in the worst case this is much better than sending lots of > > emails to grouchy users. At least the admins get the _choice_. > > Sysadmins can't be expected to, and shouldn't have to edit the local > machine files after every update/patch release. This is crucial. > > Look at other options. We've offered some.
Both options included putting more stuff into /etc/skel/. In that case it may be better to revoke this case (PSARC 2007/233) instead of causing even _more_ /etc/skel/-related nightmares for the admins. > > > I have no argument with changing man to be more intelligent in > > > searching for manual pages, BTW. > > > > Ok... but that's a different ARC case... ;-/ > > Not if this case intended to ship better defaults for man(1) (and other > programs) in /etc/profile and friends. > > > Erm, /etc/bash.bashrc and /etc/bash.bash_logout are _new_ files, only > > /etc/ksh.kshrc will be changed to set PS1 if not set yet. > > You get to do this once, then after that you either replace customer > content or you don't install new content. On Update. On patch. That's > just not nice. Not on patch. Both "update" and "reinstall" is Ok since the admins are in charge of the machines and have to read the documentation and emails. And from my experience the "updates" cause so much damange to installations that this little ToDo-item for the admins won't hurt. Updates are never working out of the box and manual adminstments are always required. > > 3rd option: Rename old, put new one in it's location and send the admin > > an email. > > Absolutely not. Not on patch. Not on update. Send e-mail?! That > won't fix the problem. Both "update" and "reinstall" would IMHO be acceptable. ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
