On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote: > :As Jordan pointed out, this gets very messy very quickly. > : > :> I don't think we should have an /etc/defaults/ directory, but if > :> it is insisted on then *ALL* the read-only files should be moved into > :> it, not just one of them. > : > :All of the files that currently mix read-only and read-write data > :will, ideally, be split so that the read-only content goes into > :/etc/defaults, and the "local changes" stay in /etc. The next big > :candidate for this is make.conf, but that will require careful testing > :first. > > I think it's a *BAD* idea to change rc.conf operation for the 3.1 > distribution. Bad Bad Bad.
This just puts it back where it was, there is nothing new, and so doing this now is quite directly in the spirit of POLA. > defaults is a bad name. Why not make it /etc/dist/ ?? for Are you seriously worried about the naming, dist versus defaults? It seems a tiny argument, but defaults is used in several other OSs (like Solaris) for precisely this purpose, and dist is often used for completely different purposes. Jordan *seems* to have done the least surprising thing. We jumped on him for the changes, and now it seems like we're jumping on him for making the corrections. Not fair. ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chu...@glue.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (Solaris7). ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
