In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: >> This is what NIS and NIS+ are for, to share these files across >> hosts. A lot of UNIX derived systems end up modifying the normal >> placement of files because a few people feel they have a "better" >> way to do things. The end result is the mess /etc has become over >> the years. I would LOVE to see /etc become configuration files
Here you seem to indicate that you don't want executable files in /etc - I agree and think this is in policy. >> only, with NO binaries in there at all. To be able to do an rgrep >> in /etc to find a config, and never have binary "garbage" fly across >> the screen would make life a LOT easier. Programs such as gated But here you say you don't want any non-text (I will use that word, as binaries seem to indicate executable files) in /etc. Which one are you refering to? >> which install themselves in /etc as the default also drive me crazy. > >Isn´t that against policy? Binaries should allways go to [s]bin >directories. In some peoples eys even the shell scripts in etc are >wrong, but they are inbetween config and binary. Not config non-text files (eg data files that are not executable). Very few programs do have binary files under /etc. postfix is the main one. Not to mention compressed rotated configuration files (apache and bind on my computer). The there is a file /etc/ioctl.save - I don't know what this is. I think /etc is the most appropriate directory, unless you want to argue For /usr/etc or even something under /var. I would argue that /etc/mtab and /etc/ioctl.save should really belongs under /var (unless you symlink /etc/mtab to /proc/mounts). >> Now, back on topic, if you need to share a file NIS/NIS+ will work. >> Someone else may have a better solution, such as Samba. > >The problem is that NIS does not work, crashes, fills a lot of garbage >int /var/log until linux crashes, has strange behaviour and is pretty >useless for a pool of diskless maschines. It works reliably for me.... I always thought that a pool of diskless machines was where NIS was its best... >Think about a pool of 100 diskless terminals all having a copy of >/etc/resolve.conf and many other files in etc. Now consider changing >the nameserver for the terminals. Its a problem of space and >administrativ work that makes me want a /usr/etc or >/etc/share. At the moment one has to copy the shareable files to >/etc/share and symlink them in /etc. Agreed. Although my diskless package doesn't require a symlink, it requires every host to be updated (via an automatic routine) which isn't exactly fast... However, resolv.conf might be required before /usr is mounted (especially if /usr is on a seperate NFS partition - this is no longer the case with my diskless package, so it would be OK). How would you cope with that? Please correct me here if I am wrong: resolv.conf can't be shared via NIS??? -- Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
