* Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 05:23:08PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Stephen Gallagher: >> >> > That being said, there are files like /etc/nsswitch.conf, /etc/pam.d/* >> > and /etc/fstab which are both API *and* sometimes see manual updates. >> > These are some of the cases that are going to make getting to an empty >> > /etc very hard to finish off. There's a lot of low-hanging fruit we >> > can take care of in the meantime, but getting the last 1% of packages >> > done is going to take a lot of inter-distro conversations. >> >> We could add some sort of :include: processing to glibc, but that's >> going to impact much more than just glibc in the end (Go has its own >> parser for /etc/passwd, I believe others have their own for >> /etc/nsswitch.conf). > > IIUC, you mean that e.g. /etc/services would still exist, but > would contain ":include:/usr/etc/services". That's not a great answer, > because you still need /etc/services to exist. No, it would be the other way round. We might have a /usr/share/glibc/services which contains :include: /etc/services somewhere in it. > It's also a rather complex solution, because special parsing is > needed… It's both easier and more powerful to say "check for > /etc/services, and if doesn't exist, fall back to > /usr/etc/services". It's: > - simple to implement and understand, > - backwards compatible in the sense that a local system that has > the file modified will work without changes, > - and as discussed in another part of the thread, we can add > optionally add tmpfiles.d config to symlink /etc/services → /usr/etc/services > on boot if there are other consumers that don't yet support the new > location. Are you sure you mean check “for /etc/services, and if doesn't exist, fall back to /usr/etc/services”? That suggests that in order to edit the file, you have to make a copy, and that means that the system won't receive any services added to the system file. “Look for the service in /etc/services, and if it's not there, check /usr/etc/services” would make more sense to me. But that's not so far off from :include: processing … Thanks, Florian -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
