Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 03:42:14PM +0200, Roland Mainz wrote:
> > Nicolas Williams wrote:
> > > 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.
> 
> OR modify the relevant programs' defaults in the programs themselves.

This will not work. Remeber PSARC 2006/587: The POSIX shell standard
_requires_ that the shell binary itself does not enable any flags by
default - which includes any default editor setting. For full
POSIX-conformance the only option is to use an external configuration
script - which is in the case of Solaris (as defined in PSARC 2006/587),
Linux etc. "/etc/ksh.kshrc". And bash has a similar file called
"/etc/bash.bashrc".

> > > > 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.
> 
> Update == patch.
> 
> > And from my experience the "updates" cause so much damange to
> > installations that this little ToDo-item for the admins won't hurt.
> 
> This case won't help.  This case can't be predicated on Sun abandoning
> updates.

I didn't propose to abandon the updates. I am just saying that most
updates and/or patches require manual cleanup work. That was always the
case and will likely continue forever.

> > Updates are never working out of the box and manual adminstments are
> > always required.
> 
> We want updates to work, so please don't make things worse.

The current /etc/skel/-based solution are a real-life nightmare. I doubt
we can make it more worse... ;-/
 
> > > > 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.
> 
> Disagree.

And I disagree with that option.

----

Bye,
Roland

-- 
  __ .  . __
 (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org
  \__\/\/__/  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
  /O /==\ O\  TEL +49 641 7950090
 (;O/ \/ \O;)

Reply via email to