Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 08:08:56AM -0000, Michael van Elst: > mo...@rodents-montreal.org (Mouse) writes: > > >> https://wiki.netbsd.org/projects/project/inetd-enhancements/ > > >> When it comes to adding per-service configuration files, our current > >> plan is to add a new configuration command, simlar to xinetd's > >> "includedir", that allows for specification of a per-service > >> configuration directory. > > >Personally, I think this is a bad idea, most fundamentally because it > >enables, even encourages, administration without understanding. > > I personally would just send things through m4. I doubt that splitting > up the configuration file into multiple files hinders understanding. > It just simplifies maintenance (putting a file instead of atomically > updating a file). It also allows to easily install services by > packages.
Not to encourage adoption of Linux misbehaviors, but I think that style of configuration where some glob of files in directory is optionally included is positive. It encourages and eases programmatic configuration (IaC) with things like puppet (as horrible as puppet is) - this is the behavior that should be encouraged and supported; reduces errors, eases DR, .... I also have faith that NetBSD (and FBSD) would do it in an organized, documented, and logical mannger - unlike Linux. I also like the file-specific include directive, but in addition to.
