FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-19-2012, 05:58 AM
Tobias Powalowski
 
Default rc.conf cleanup why?

Hi
http://projects.archlinux.org/initscripts.git/commit/?id=5b062674869c97018871b1f91c0b22d27ae900f7
I don't think this is a good idea, I liked the described options in
rc.conf. Now you have to switch to an other terminal to read what
options are possible.

pacman.conf and makepackage.conf also have comments on important
options, so why remove parameters from the most important config file?

greetings
tpowa
 
Old 07-19-2012, 06:01 AM
Pierre Schmitz
 
Default rc.conf cleanup why?

Am 19.07.2012 07:58, schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
> Hi
> http://projects.archlinux.org/initscripts.git/commit/?id=5b062674869c97018871b1f91c0b22d27ae900f7
> I don't think this is a good idea, I liked the described options in
> rc.conf. Now you have to switch to an other terminal to read what
> options are possible.
>
> pacman.conf and makepackage.conf also have comments on important
> options, so why remove parameters from the most important config file?

Probably a matter of taste. Personally I like my config files without
comments; it just gives you a better overview.

Greetings,

Pierre

--
Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com
 
Old 07-19-2012, 09:55 AM
Tom Gundersen
 
Default rc.conf cleanup why?

Tobias,

I'd like to nudge people into thinking twice before using these options. In
addition to documenting what options exist, the man page also explains why
you should not use them.

As of the next release initscripts will do the right thing when rc.conf is
empty.

I also started adding warnings whenever people have
contradictory/nonsensical options specified (usually solved by deleting the
options).

Tom
On Jul 19, 2012 7:58 AM, "Tobias Powalowski" <
tobias.powalowski@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
> http://projects.archlinux.org/initscripts.git/commit/?id=5b062674869c97018871b1f91c0b22d27ae900f7
> I don't think this is a good idea, I liked the described options in
> rc.conf. Now you have to switch to an other terminal to read what
> options are possible.
>
> pacman.conf and makepackage.conf also have comments on important
> options, so why remove parameters from the most important config file?
>
> greetings
> tpowa
>
 
Old 07-19-2012, 09:56 AM
Tom Gundersen
 
Default rc.conf cleanup why?

I should add: the reason I prefer manages rather than comments is that they
can be more verbose and updated more frequently.
On Jul 19, 2012 11:55 AM, "Tom Gundersen" <teg@jklm.no> wrote:

> Tobias,
>
> I'd like to nudge people into thinking twice before using these options.
> In addition to documenting what options exist, the man page also explains
> why you should not use them.
>
> As of the next release initscripts will do the right thing when rc.conf is
> empty.
>
> I also started adding warnings whenever people have
> contradictory/nonsensical options specified (usually solved by deleting the
> options).
>
> Tom
> On Jul 19, 2012 7:58 AM, "Tobias Powalowski" <
> tobias.powalowski@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> http://projects.archlinux.org/initscripts.git/commit/?id=5b062674869c97018871b1f91c0b22d27ae900f7
>> I don't think this is a good idea, I liked the described options in
>> rc.conf. Now you have to switch to an other terminal to read what
>> options are possible.
>>
>> pacman.conf and makepackage.conf also have comments on important
>> options, so why remove parameters from the most important config file?
>>
>> greetings
>> tpowa
>>
>
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:29 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org