Linux is not about choice [was Re: Fedora too cutting edge?]
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
Thu Jan 10 18:48:32 UTC 2008
David Zeuthen wrote:
>>> There's the bad idea that everything under /etc/ is configurable, but in
>>> reality these rules are "program data" and ideally should go into /share
>>> if that existed (which would avoid people thinking they're meant to
>>> touch that stuff, hopefully).
>> I'm having trouble parsing that statement. Are you saying that people
>> shouldn't be able to edit their own /etc/xxx files as documented by the
>> upstream programs or that the distribution should move the parts that it
>> modifies with its internal tools elsewhere?
>
> Lots of files under /etc are not marked as %config or %config(noreplace)
> and they are not really configuration files. It's a problem because
> novice users just assume they can and should edit such files and then
> they get confused when said file is overwritten on a package upgrade.
>
> Does that make more sense?
It doesn't disambiguate the situation unless you are saying that local
administrators should not touch any files. How does a (novice or not)
user know which files belong to him but are delivered as working
defaults and which will be clobbered by subsequent updates? I thought
most of the point of splattering stuff under /etc/sysconfig was to have
a place to put distribution-tool managed bits without too much impact on
standard, documented config files as they would work in other distributions.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list