On 6/22/17 10:08 AM, Ngie Cooper wrote:
>
>> On Jun 22, 2017, at 03:28, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/22/17 4:02 AM, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 22, 2017, at 00:35, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> …
>>>
>>>> Please revert the breakout of the existing config files. I think that
>>>> splitting
>>>> up the conf files is too disruptive of a change (POLA) for stable branches.
>>>
>>> Done in r320229 and r320230.
>>
>> I haven't checked if this was merged to 11, but if so, I think they should
>> also
>> stay a single conf file in 11 for the same reason.
>
> No, it wasn't merged to 11, so no further action required here.
>
>>>> This was agreed to by other folks in the followup thread to the commits in
>>>> head that you continue to ignore.
>>>
>>>
>>>> In head please either fully split up the files or revert to a single file
>>>> (another part of that thread you continue to ignore).
>>>
>>> My eyes glazed over trying to read through all of the posts. I seem to
>>> have missed the point where a proposed change was made to split up the
>>> config files further. Could this please be summarized again?
>>
>> I think that having the files partially split up is the worst of both
>> worlds as folks writing config management rules, etc. have to use
>> different approaches depending on the rule. I think that is a headache
>> and would rather have the config either be all in a single file, or all
>> be split up into conf.d/ so that it is consistent. I also think that
>> when splitting up a conf file we should do it all at once so that there is
>> only one painful /etc merge instead of several of them.
>
> This still doesn't answer my concern fully. In what way are the config files
> in base not broken down 100%, i.e., what action can I take to resolve your
> concerns about it not being fully modularized? I think syslog.conf having
> kerberos.log is likely the last issue, but I would really like clarification
> in order to move forward.
Hmm, I had assumed that in a fully modularized form we wouldn't have foo.conf
at all, but _only_ files in conf.d. However, looking at the files it does seem
that there are some system-wide entries that aren't part of a specific program
and that those should probably stay in foo.conf. I do think there are some
remaining entries that are for a single program though:
For syslog.conf:
- /var/log/cron probably belongs in /etc/syslog.d/cron.conf?
- commented out lines for /var/log/devd.log belong in /etc/syslogd.d/devd.conf?
For newsyslog.conf:
- /var/log/cron -> cron.conf
- /var/log/{daily,monthly,security,weekly}.log -> periodic.conf
- /var/log/init.log -> init.conf?
- /var/log/kerberos.log -> kerberos.conf
- /var/log/devd.log -> devd.conf
--
John Baldwin
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
