Re: on /etc/sysconfig

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 19.07.11 03:43, Miloslav Trmač (mitr@xxxxxxxx) wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Lennart Poettering
> <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, 18.07.11 23:26, Miloslav Trmač (mitr@xxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >> I can't see a reason to discuss /etc/sysconfig as a single unit, nor
> >> to argue for removal of /etc/sysconfig a single unit, nor to try to
> >> form a definite consensus about /etc/sysconfig.
> >
> > Oh, it definitely can be discussed as single unit. Check the Fedora
> > packaging guidelines:
> >
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SysVInitScript
> <snip>
> 
> >> * _various_ software: Each file needs to be discussed separately, in
> >> the context of the software that uses it.
> >> /etc/sysconfig/{crond,iptables,nspluginwrapper} have nothing in
> >> common, and need to be considered separately together with the
> >> software that uses these files.
> >
> > Nah, not true. The packaging guidelines say explicitly what you should
> > place in that directory.
> They only say that SysV scripts should be placed in that directory,
> not that SysV files are the only, or primary, content.  I have already
> provided a counterexample above.

As I already made clear in the original blog story: they aren't the only
but they are the main contents of the directory.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux