The Strengths and Weakness of Fedora/RHEL OS management

[Hans de Goede]

n0dalus wrote:
> On 3/30/06, Avi Alkalay <avi at unix.sh> wrote:
>> Hummm, never heard about puppet. Seems interesting.
>> The problem I see with this approach is the additional layer that manages
>> the configuration files syntax. And again: ALL configuration files can be
>> represented by an hierarchy of key/value pairs. They are different because
>> they received a considerable amount of syntax fat to make them look nicer to
>> your human eyes. And what puppet seems to do is try to work with this fat.
>>
> 
> What would be really cool is to have a file-system based configuration
> system, where a config file is mounted into a user space or kernel
> file-system driver. Then programs could use whatever config file
> format they like, and as long as there is a translation module for it,
> people can change/view things with simple echo/cat commands. Like
> /proc/sys/.
> Eg: cat 80 > /conf/httpd/Listen
> 

Actually this is a (great) idea, with fuse (userspace filesystems) this 
should be doable, I think fuse <-> gconf bridge would be a nice start 
for this.

What do others think? This feels very much like the unix way. (Yeah yet 
another filesystem, howmany can we get / do we need?

Regards,

Hans