Ingo Schwarze <schwa...@usta.de> wrote: > One - admittedly completely unUNIXy - way would be to invent a long, > descriptive name like /etc/kernel.config.commands or even /bsd.config.cmd > in the root rather than the /etc directory, which is more discoverable > because it is right next to the kernel itself. The UNIXy way > is not necessarily better: Ken would have invented a very short, > pronouncable name that is not an English word but similar to one, > like /etc/sycoc (for SYstem COnfiguration Commands).
I have no idea why you talk about Ken, how obscure back in those days it wasn't called /kernel, either. the pathname "kernel.something" which is supposed to be somewhat related to a non-existant pathname "kernel", is what I object to. perhaps /etc/bsd.re-config but certainly the sub-phrase "kernel" is not discoverable.
