Subject: Re: Posible virc(8) implementation
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <>
From: Greg A. Woods <>
List: current-users
Date: 05/05/2000 01:16:03
[ On Thursday, May 4, 2000 at 16:49:28 (-0700), Jonathan Stone wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Posible virc(8) implementation 
> In message <>Greg A. Woods writes
> >[ On Thursday, May 4, 2000 at 11:33:30 (-0700), Jonathan Stone wrote: ]
> >
> >I don't see the problem. You still only have to edit exactly the same
> >number of files to make your cloned machine unique.   [...]
> The common case for the changes I'm describing are *zero* files to
> edit, and *one* file to move or copy.  rc.d on one handy machine has
> 70-odd scripts. It deosn't have an rc.conf.d, but the number of
> distinct rc.conf.d files would be in that ballpark.

You must have a different definition of "cloning" than I do.

If I were cloning a machine I'd clone it as it sits, with dump, pax, or
dd and then I'd edit /etc/myname and *maybe* /etc/ifconfig.le0
(depending on whether I use /etc/hosts and whether or not it's already
got the new hostname in it).  In the proposed /etc/rc.conf.d scheme I
don't see that there would be any more files to edit than this.

> hint: 0 != 70 and 1 != 70.
> Dd you have a point to make here, or not?

Yeah, why aren't you *cloning* the machine instead of trying to
re-create it by transformation of a default install?!?!?!

If nothing else you could do a default install and then use rsync to
copy any changed files -- i.e. to create a real clone.  That's not the
most efficient way to do things of course, but it's hard to make a
mistake that way....

> I say that I *dont* *want* all the extra overhead and hassle you
> mention.  In response, you criticize my sysadmin-ing as too "ad-hoc".

but I also tried to understand why you though there would be additional
effort if rc.conf were split into several files when I couldn't see that
there would be any difference at all to a cloning process.

> If you're trying to cause offense, you've succeeded.

Oops... sorry...  I didn't mean to imply that ad hoc sysadmin techniques
were flat out wrong -- just that they were prone to error.  If the level
of risk that's implied is not a problem for you then by all means please
don't change how you do things just because I say something off the cuff
about it.

> Greg, why do you even participate on this list?
> If you want SysV systems, you know where to find them.

This has *NOTHING* to do with SysV -- I really really really wish some
of you folks would quit trying to put words and ideas into other
people's mouths/fingers/whatever.

							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <>; Secrets of the Weird <>