On 2013-04-07 12:18 PM, Jarry <mr.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 07-Apr-13 18:03, Tanstaafl wrote:
Every sysadmin knows (or should know) that a config file full of nothing
but comments isn't going to do *anything* other than provide whatever
defaults the program is designed to use in such a case.
True, but only if admin checks content of the file. The lazy one (me)
just checked size (ls -l /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules),
found it is not linked to /dev/null and the file size is 1667 bytes,
and satisfied that he checked all what was in news-item rebooted...
Devs should not over-estimate users. Or I put it other way:
every news-item should be fool-proof (if it is possible)...
Or put another way, lazy devs should simply admit that they run the risk
of making silly mistakes like this because of their laziness.
Failure to check the actual contents of a file critical to system
operation (whether booting or network) when it is specifically mentioned
in release notes (or a news item) is just asking for precisely these
kinds of problems. I'm sympathetic with Nick, but I don't feel sorry for
him, he did this to himself.
Hell, I'm *still* analyzing things before pulling the trigger, and I'm
100% certain that I've got a handle on what to do now (after lots of
reading and asking questions here)...
