The Strengths and Weakness of Fedora/RHEL OS management

Shane Stixrud shane at
Sun Apr 2 08:55:59 UTC 2006

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Horst von Brand wrote:

> Shane Stixrud <shane at> wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Bill Crawford wrote:
> [...]
>>> Ah. The "it must all be integrated" straw man. (sigh)
>> There is no straw man, real advantages and features become available
>> when configuration data is unified.
> If you mean "single format", I might agree (but that is /much/ harder than
> it looks, the needs range from a handful of variables to complex structured
> "programs" in specialized languages). If you also mean "single repository",
> you are way off the deep end (Hint: Single point of failure, no way to
> handle alternative configurations, no way to chroot the config, ...)

By unified I mean all configuration syntax is predictable, hierarchical   and 

I also mean multi-repository i.e. Elektra like filesys, dbm etc... My 
preferred "repository" would be an on-disk hierarchical   directory/file 
structure (filesys) where each application/subsystem has a 
its own root directory and optional sub-directories.

Read the rest of this thread and you will see all of your concerns have 
already been addressed i.e. chroot, alternate configs.


More information about the devel mailing list