Wichert == Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wichert [...] most files in /etc/init.d are marked as
Wichert conffiles. But only a couple of them actually contain
Wichert configuration-info.
Have yous seen the /etc/sysconfig setup in Red Hat 5.0? I wonder
if we need that
Shaya Potter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
--This might mean that Linuxconf will error out if it can't parse the file,
if you've made private changes to it. That's the tradeoff, you take a risk
that you won't be able to use linuxconf if you privately edit the file. We
will work to improve
Andreas Degert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, i meant you can't prevent the parser to error out on some edited
config files, not that it will happen with every edited config file.
config files which are broken should be treated as error conditions.
For example, if you put this email message into
Andreas Degert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
please don't answer too quickly; if you think about it a second
(in the context of the thread) you will realize that I wrote about
syntactically and semantically correct config files that are too
complex for the parser.
That shouldn't matter for context
Andreas Degert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is not the point; of course just the parsing, the syntactical
portion, is rather easy. Else, how should a program like samba parse
it's config files? Even if it's a complex embedded language, by
definition its syntax can be parsed, and if it's for a
On 4 Jun 1998, Andreas Degert wrote:
If you look at config files like .emacs or /etc/profile where it's
apparent that they use a structured language, it's much more clear
that a configuration program can't grok each possible config file the
user can write with an editor.
It's also
Previously G John Lapeyre wrote:
It's also not uncommon to see config files which just contain perl
code. (Majordomo comes to mind) . Probably python programs do this too.
But nobody said all conffiles should be managed by linuxconfig (or any
configuration system for that matter). A lot
I was wondering if we have reached some sort of consesus on Linuxconf.
The points that I see are
*Linuxconf can't lose any info.
--This might mean that Linuxconf will error out if it can't parse the file,
if you've made private changes to it. That's the tradeoff, you take a risk
that you won't
Shaya Potter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was wondering if we have reached some sort of consesus on Linuxconf.
The points that I see are
*Linuxconf can't lose any info.
--This might mean that Linuxconf will error out if it can't parse the file,
if you've made private changes
9 matches
Mail list logo
