Re: Explicit config patch 7.2B4 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Andrew G. Hammond |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Explicit config patch 7.2B4 |
Date | |
Msg-id | 1008794500.861.23.camel@xyzzy Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Explicit config patch 7.2B4 (Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Explicit config patch 7.2B4
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2001-12-18 at 22:27, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > > > > Using Apache and modssl under debian linux, the certs live in > > > /etc/apache. Similarly, crypto keys for Nessus live in /etc/nessusd. > > > So /etc/postgresql would be reasonable. > > > > Just a note from a FreeBSD (ie. a decent filesystem standard layout) it > > horrifies me to see post-install packages put stuff in /etc/. Of course, > > whomever writes the FreeBSD port will override this default and put it in > > /usr/local/etc/pgsql. > > Which is why I avoid rpm, deb, package, etc. The support nightmare it > causes when vendors start upchucking various bits and pieces of the > program all over the drive. Then the poor user tries explaining what > he did or tried to do in /var, /etc, /opt and a bunch of other places > (up to and not necessarily excluding the trunk of the car) and figuring > out something as simple as where a certain file is so the permissions > can be verified or where the include files and libraries happen to be > hiding. > > No, this is not an invite for the discussion of whether or not vendors > should or should not scatter files all over the filesystem. It's only > a statement of what it causes on the support end - no, not all people > contact the vendor of the os when they have a problem with a program. Funny, I have exactly the same opinion about stuff scattered all over the filesystem, but that's one of the reasons I like debian. They don't scatter stuff, they organize it. And, at least to me things make sense that way. Config files are under /etc. All of them. For every package. Since it's utterly impossible to get a whole bunch of different people to agree about where stuff belongs, or even to have a rational discussion on the topic, having the distros impose this sort of thing by fiat seems to be the only way to get any kind of consistency at all. Honestly, I really don't give a damn what filesystem layout I end up using, as long as it's reasonably simple and logical. However I will say that personally, I like having a path that's less than a gigabyte. Debian delivers that for me. But hey, to each their own. ObFlame: BSD sux. That little devil looks kinda fruity to me, and I'll bet Tux could whup his ass. -- Andrew G. Hammond mailto:drew@xyzzy.dhs.org http://xyzzy.dhs.org/~drew/ 56 2A 54 EF 19 C0 3B 43 72 69 5B E3 69 5B A1 1F 613-389-5481 5CD3 62B0 254B DEB1 86E0 8959 093E F70A B457 84B1 "To blow recursion you must first blow recur" -- me
pgsql-hackers by date: