On Sat, 2005-11-19 at 03:55 +0000, Joe Desbonnet wrote: > On 11/19/05, Gilboa Davara <gilboada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote > > > > Which means: as complex as the schema; and if you decide to create a > > single catch-all schema for all services, you'll end-up with huge > > complex XML files that makes it almost impossible to recover a dead > > machine using a single text editor. (vim/pico/etc) > > No, a single catch all schema would be stupid. Combine several schemas > as needed. Eg a schema can define basic system constants such as > usernames, lists of usernames, groups, permissions, access control > lists etc. > > > Let me do the text version of this. > > > > #This is my version of things. > > > > # General. > > SERVICENAME=NFS_main > > SERVICEGROUP=NFS > > Ok, is that encoded as UTF-8, ISO-8859-1 or what?. How do I encode a > CR or LF in the values? How are double quotes handled? Are equal > signs escaped? > > My point -- when writing parsers the devil is in the details. Config > file parsing is something that the application developer should not > concern themselves with. They should be able to rely on a standard > library to return the config file in a object/structure that the > software can consume. Ummm... I can agree to most of the above, however, A. I've yet to be convinced that there's /a need/ for international text support within a service manager. B. There are dozens of project that do config parsing; why not find a good text parser and use it code? > > Joe. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
