on /etc/sysconfig

[Lennart Poettering]

On Mon, 18.07.11 17:00, Simo Sorce (simo at redhat.com) wrote:

> > > > > Generally speaking I like the idea of dropping /etc/sysconfig. I think
> > > > > the right way it keeping minimal, standardized configuration in
> > > > > /etc/services.conf/ or something like that.
> > > > 
> > > > No. There is no need for a directory that replaces /etc/sysconfig. It's
> > > > borked. If a daemon has not configuration file but should have one, then
> > > > fix the daemon, don't fake a configuration file.
> > > 
> > > Some daemons cannot be "fixed", get over with this mantra that daemons
> > > need be fixed Lennart.
> > 
> > Hmm? Which ones in fedora can't? Are you suggesting we are shipping
> > software that cannot be modified? If so, please explain which one that
> > is, since we need to remove it from the distro then. Fedora only
> > includess Free Software, and software that cannot be modified would not
> > qualify as that.
> 
> Asking some upstream to add a whole configuration file reading subsystem
> to extremely simple daemons that accept a handful of command line
> options can be rightfully answered with a simple "no".

Example please?

> Command line options are nothing wrong and have been around for ages,
> there is nothing to "fix" in daemons that do not read a config file.

Command line options are not wrong, they are completely fine.

What I am saying that faking configuration files, by having wrapper
scripts which build command lines from env var config files is not
ideal. But this was already discussed on this very ML, so I see no
reason to warm this up again.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.