Takayuki Tsunakawa wrote:
From: "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Meeting FHS requirements is no bad thing, though. And the ability to
include a common configuration set in multiple instances is surely
useful to a number of people. After all, you aren't forced to use
these
facilities - I typically don't.


Thank you, Andrew-san.
What I want to know is a more concreet thing.

How useful are those facilities to what kind of users in what cases?
Is there a reason why users in the real world positively use those
facilities?


If you want to find out about usage patterns this is probably not the best place to survey users - the hackers are not very representative of users in general. I have a sneaking suspicion that include directives are not used a whole lot, but alternative file locations are much more widely used.

My off-the-cuff advice about your tool would be to process any include directives when reading the config file, but initially just write out new settings to the top level file (at the end, so they don't get overridden by the includes).

cheers

andrew

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to