[ On Tue, December 15, 1998 at 18:53:12 (-0800), Curt Sampson wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Package Paths Proposal v2
>
> In short, sharing config files is not normal, it's a Serious
> Administrative Decision that we should not encourage in novice
> sysadmins. In the non-novices, it will be dealt with for the
> non-package stuff, and so there's no need for the package system
> to provide another mechanism to do this.

Exactly!

> Also, I want to stress again the importance of having One True
> Configuration Directory on a system, regardless of where programs
> come from.

I don't agree with this in all circumstances.

The problems you mention are not caused simply because there's more than
one configuration directory.

People who do want "one true config directory" can use "/pkg -> /" and
live with the consequences.  Those are the kind of people who will
probably like having just /bin and /usr/bin anyway.  I like it that way
sometimes myself, especially if I need to simplify things drastically so
that operators cannot make any mistakes like those you suggested, or if
I want to create a complete custom-integrated system.

Meanwhile I *want* /usr/pkg/etc/ (and I wouldn't necessarily mind having
/usr/pkg/var/) in some circumstances (i.e. when I want packages
installed in a separate hierarchy then I definitely want their
configuration files separated, and if their "var" files must also be
separated then that's fine too).  I've found it extremely helpful to
keep totally separate hierarchies of system and "local" stuff, not only
so that system upgrades don't disturb packages and vice versa, but also
so local stuff *can* have conflicting names, and lastly so that users
and "operators" can clearly see what they're getting over and above the
basic system.  Mixing up package config files (and log files) with
system config files (and log files) can also make it less apparent how a
package works as a whole, and I've seen that confuse junior system
administrators too where segregation helps their understanding and lets
them see the bigger picture more clearly.

> > 3. It must be possible to have the package system install files in a
> >    separate area, where they are not mixed in with the standard system
> >    binaries.
> 
> If nobody else is particularly unhapppy about it being dropped, I
> can live with it easily enough. (I do a lot of my package work on
> a machine I wipe once in a while anyway.)

I don't think we can drop that requirement.  I certainly want to keep it!

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <gwoods@acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>