"Chatty" config files in /etc

[Tom Rhodes]

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 01:34:35 +0400
Ruslan Ermilov <ru at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 05:21:13PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Thursday 31 August 2006 16:09, Garance A Drosehn wrote:
> > > At 8:48 AM -0400 8/31/06, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > >On Thursday 31 August 2006 06:18, Tom Rhodes wrote:
> > > >>  On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 14:00:04 +0400
> > > >  > Ruslan Ermilov <ru at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >  > > No, /etc/defaults are different beasties -- they are true
> > > >>  > default config files -- they are either used if there's no
> > > >>  > corresponding version under /etc, or most likely sourced
> > > >>  > to provide defaults.  To be moved to /etc/defaults, a file
> > > >>  > should gain the same property.
> > > >>
> > > >>  While this comment is blatently obvious: /etc/examples
> > > >
> > > >This is already spelled /usr/share/examples/etc in FreeBSD.
> > > 
> > > Actually, as it stands right now that is not quite the same
> > > thing.  Right now /usr/share/examples/etc holds *exact copies*
> > > of the files we install in /etc, for the reasons as described
> > > in /usr/share/examples/etc/README.examples :
> > 
> > I was thinking of /usr/share/examples/ppp (I thought it had
> > been under /usr/share/examples/etc/ppp).  Having
> > /usr/share/examples/etc in its current form really isn't all
> > that useful as for one thing it has rotted a bunch.  I think
> > instead that we should repurpose it for expanded versions of
> > files.  The current format of /etc/printcap should be an example
> > file for example (it fits with /usr/share/examples/ppp style)
> > and I think we shouldn't even have an /etc/printcap installed
> > by default.  Same with /etc/hosts.allow.
> > 
> /usr/share/examples/etc/make.conf is the example to follow.

Very true.  I'm digging this idea.

-- 
Tom Rhodes