Re: minor heads up - /etc/make.conf{,.local} being moved
Matthew Dillon wrote: (Approved by jkh) /etc/make.conf.local will become /etc/make.conf and /etc/make.conf will become /etc/defaults/make.conf. This change is long overdue. The sys.mk adjustment has already been committed. An email has been sent to the CVS meisters to get /usr/src/etc/make.conf moved. make will dump out with an appropriate error and instructions if you update your source tree and still have an /etc/make.conf.local. I like this change (kind of) but is it really necessary to cause make to exit if there is a make.conf.local? Why not have it read all 3? One of the things we talked about at the 'Con was that a three tiered system works well for rc.conf when you have a lot of machines sharing similar configuration details, but with some unique elements present on each machine. Perhaps I'm missing something, but how can make.conf.local be a bad thing? Doug -- "Stop it, I'm gettin' misty." - Mel Gibson as Porter, "Payback" To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: minor heads up - /etc/make.conf{,.local} being moved
: sent to the CVS meisters to get /usr/src/etc/make.conf moved. : : make will dump out with an appropriate error and instructions if you : update your source tree and still have an /etc/make.conf.local. : : I like this change (kind of) but is it really necessary to cause make :to exit if there is a make.conf.local? Why not have it read all 3? One :of the things we talked about at the 'Con was that a three tiered system :works well for rc.conf when you have a lot of machines sharing similar :configuration details, but with some unique elements present on each :machine. Perhaps I'm missing something, but how can make.conf.local be a :bad thing? : :Doug I think it is necessary to make it exit for now, because what we are really doing is a net-0 gain in files... turning what used to be functionality in /etc/make.conf.local into /etc/make.conf. The intent is not to add a third file. If the intent were to add a third configuration file then, sure, we could allow all three. But that isn't my intent. I am somewhat worried that people upgrading from 3.x to 4.x will get confused if that error message is not in there. -Matt Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: minor heads up - /etc/make.conf{,.local} being moved
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Doug Barton wrote: I think it is necessary to make it exit for now, because what we are really doing is a net-0 gain in files... turning what used to be functionality in /etc/make.conf.local into /etc/make.conf. The intent is not to add a third file. If the intent were to add a third configuration file then, sure, we could allow all three. But that isn't my intent. Ok, well put me on record as wanting three files. While I still have I am not for proliferation of config files. rc.conf and rc.conf.local should have been handled the same way AFAIC. Put me down as wanting two files. An extra file is just more shtuff to keep track of. I too am iffy on /etc/defaults. If the purpose of defaults is to keep "standard" things in isolation then lets do that. Begrudgingly, defaults do clean up /etc a bit. It makes mergemastering easier too. The defaults will be better when they become more complete. some reservations about the whole /etc/defaults thing, I believe that if we are going to use it we should use it to full advantage, offering people more functionality, not less. Unless I am missing something, the The number of files relating to make would still be two. The purpose of each of those files is the same. The new functionality is precisely equal to the previous functionality. Thank You, | http://students.washington.edu/jcwells/ Jason Wells To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: minor heads up - /etc/make.conf{,.local} being moved
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 10:41:19PM +, Jason C. Wells wrote: Put me down as wanting two files. An extra file is just more shtuff to keep track of. I too am iffy on /etc/defaults. If the purpose of defaults is to keep "standard" things in isolation then lets do that. Begrudgingly, defaults do clean up /etc a bit. It makes mergemastering easier too. The defaults will be better when they become more complete. The thing about the defaults/foo.conf, foo.conf, foo.conf.local scheme is that you don't _have_ to use foo.conf.local if you don't want to. Some of us have a use for it, such as putting site configuration in foo.conf, and machine configuration in foo.conf.local. -- Christopher Masto Senior Network Monkey NetMonger Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.netmonger.net Free yourself, free your machine, free the daemon -- http://www.freebsd.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: minor heads up - /etc/make.conf{,.local} being moved
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Jason C. Wells wrote: On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Doug Barton wrote: I think it is necessary to make it exit for now, because what we are really doing is a net-0 gain in files... turning what used to be functionality in /etc/make.conf.local into /etc/make.conf. The intent is not to add a third file. If the intent were to add a third configuration file then, sure, we could allow all three. But that isn't my intent. Ok, well put me on record as wanting three files. While I still have Put me down as wanting two files. An extra file is just more shtuff to keep track of. I too am iffy on /etc/defaults. If the purpose of defaults is to keep "standard" things in isolation then lets do that. Begrudgingly, defaults do clean up /etc a bit. It makes mergemastering easier too. The defaults will be better when they become more complete. Actually system updates are exactly why I treat the /etc/defaults business with a great deal of mistrust. It hides (or more precisely, it _can_ hide) details of changes and new options from the user. Using mergemaster at least allows you to see more clearly what has been changed, however It still makes me nervous. I'm contemplating some changes that will help correlate differences between /etc/defaults/*.conf and /etc/*.conf[.local], but right now I have no time to hack them out. some reservations about the whole /etc/defaults thing, I believe that if we are going to use it we should use it to full advantage, offering people more functionality, not less. Unless I am missing something, the The number of files relating to make would still be two. The purpose of each of those files is the same. The new functionality is precisely equal to the previous functionality. Well I don't think that you've made a case yet that the number of files should be zero sum, and as someone pointed out you don't have to use make.conf.local if you don't want or need it. My points are simply that we already have a precedent, the three-tier system for rc.conf has proven to be useful, and if we are going to make a change anyway let's give the user more options, not less. Doug -- "Stop it, I'm gettin' misty." - Mel Gibson as Porter, "Payback" To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: minor heads up - /etc/make.conf{,.local} being moved
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The sys.mk adjustment has already been committed. An email has been sent to the CVS meisters to get /usr/src/etc/make.conf moved. Are you sure? I didn't receive anything from you. John -- John Polstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] John D. Polstra Co., Inc.Seattle, Washington USA "No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up."-- Nora Ephron To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: minor heads up - /etc/make.conf{,.local} being moved
: :In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matthew :Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : : The sys.mk adjustment has already been committed. An email has : been sent to the CVS meisters to get /usr/src/etc/make.conf : moved. : :Are you sure? I didn't receive anything from you. : :John : John Polstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] I emailed Peter so as not to create any confusion because he seemed active at the time, but if either if you could move the file I would appreciate it! -Matt Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: minor heads up - /etc/make.conf{,.local} being moved
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I emailed Peter so as not to create any confusion because he seemed active at the time, but if either if you could move the file I would appreciate it! Good, I've just done it. Your best bet for CVS requests is to mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]. That way Peter, Mark, and I will all get it. John -- John Polstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] John D. Polstra Co., Inc.Seattle, Washington USA "No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up."-- Nora Ephron To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
