Subject: Re: /etc/security issues
To: NetBSD Userlevel Technical Discussion List <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/03/2001 14:42:49
>> (2) as regards bin/12727 and bin/12729, i was considering changing
>> /etc/security to keep the paths to files being backed up intact, but
>> with the value of $backup_dir prepended. that means that the file
>> /etc/bootparams, which is currently being backed up as
>> $backup_dir/bootparams, would now be backed up as
>This is along the same lines as the plan I'd been hoping to use in my
>implementation with RCS too.
the current /etc/security (along with the current /etc/rc.subr and the
current /etc/defaults/security.conf) already has a mechanism for doign
rcs based file backups.
>> this would allow us to track the files in
>> /etc/rc.d with very little difficulty, since /etc/bootparams and
>> /etc/rc.d/bootparams would no longer map to the same backup file name.
>> i have a simple patch to /etc/security to do this (and to move the old
>> backup files to the new names). comments?
>As for /etc/rc.d/*, why the heck would you want to list those files in
>/etc/changelist? They should really never change unless they're from a
technically, yes, but...
>I've no objections to any individual administrator listing them there,
>but no distribution should ever come that way by default. Any changes
>necessary in those scripts would indicate deficiencies that should be
>fixed in the source....
...we should make it easier on the admin who wants to archive /etc/foo
and /etc/rc.d/foo so that the backups do not step on each other.
the bootparams file was given only as an example.
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
email@example.com * "ah! i see you have the internet
firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
email@example.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."