>From a users point of view - dont do it.
Stay simple and standard (i.e., equal to upstream as per the gentoo
philosophy).
Its easier for users to understand (and find documentation for) and less
likely to break.
Expert users will make changes anyway and they have the knowledge to do
so - its almost impossible to second guess what everyone is going to do
- the experts will do their own thing anyway as no matter what you do,
it wont be suitable for everyone. If you make the configuration more
complex so its "experts only" to understand it, its not going to do
anyone a favour.
This proliferation of non-standard configuration files
(i.e., /etc/conf.d) that gentoo does, and the changes that keep
happening to them is one of the hardest things for a user to keep up
with - for an example of the problems this causes, see the networking
scripts! (constant changes, broken networking etc - yes they are now
better at this point in time, but I wonder when the next change will
occur that will unexpectedly kill my remote systems ...)
Billk
On Sun, 2007-08-26 at 09:05 +0300, Alin Năstac wrote:
> A gentoo user requested in bug 190143 [1] to change the way pppd deals
> with interface up/down events. He requested to break current
> ip-up/ip-down functionality into different scripts contained in
> /etc/ppp/(ip-up.d,ip-down.d}.
>
> What do you think about? Is it worth it?
>
> Personally I think it is a good idea, but I have reserves when it comes
> to user defined {ip-up,ip-down}.local scripts. IMO the best way to solve
> this is to add this code to pkg_postinst():
> if [ -f "${ROOT}"etc/ppp/ip-up.local ]; then
> mv "${ROOT}"etc/ppp/ip-up.local "${ROOT}"etc/ppp/ip-up.d/99-local
> fi
>
> [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=190143
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
