On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 11:20 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > Nils Philippsen wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 11:54 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote: > >> On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 10:40 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > >>> We are badly in need of system-config-udev. I spent several hours > >>> understanding udev adn building rules for my sound cards and tv cards. > >>> I hadn't done a yum update on my F7 box for weeks/months (lazyness) > >>> did one this week, and it apperently just blew away my custom udev > >>> config > >> Hell no. We are in badly need of this crap just working out of the box. > >> Throwing configuration / options at the problem will only make it worse. > >> Trying to explain this to people is apparently impossible since people > >> keep proposing stupid configuration tools with "unbreak my system" > >> options. > > > > There's the bad idea that everything under /etc/ is configurable, but in > > reality these rules are "program data" and ideally should go into /share > > if that existed (which would avoid people thinking they're meant to > > touch that stuff, hopefully). > > I'm having trouble parsing that statement. Are you saying that people > shouldn't be able to edit their own /etc/xxx files as documented by the > upstream programs or that the distribution should move the parts that it > modifies with its internal tools elsewhere? Lots of files under /etc are not marked as %config or %config(noreplace) and they are not really configuration files. It's a problem because novice users just assume they can and should edit such files and then they get confused when said file is overwritten on a package upgrade. Does that make more sense? David -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list