Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 08:08:56AM -0000, Michael van Elst:
mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost (Mouse) writes:
https://wiki.netbsd.org/projects/project/inetd-enhancements/
When it comes to adding per-service configuration files, our current
plan is to add a new configuration command, simlar to xinetd's
"includedir", that allows for specification of a per-service
configuration directory.
Personally, I think this is a bad idea, most fundamentally because it
enables, even encourages, administration without understanding.
I personally would just send things through m4. I doubt that splitting
up the configuration file into multiple files hinders understanding.
It just simplifies maintenance (putting a file instead of atomically
updating a file). It also allows to easily install services by
packages.
Not to encourage adoption of Linux misbehaviors, but I think that style
of configuration where some glob of files in directory is optionally
included is positive. It encourages and eases programmatic configuration
(IaC) with things like puppet (as horrible as puppet is) - this is the
behavior that should be encouraged and supported; reduces errors, eases
DR, .... I also have faith that NetBSD (and FBSD) would do it in an
organized, documented, and logical mannger - unlike Linux.
I also like the file-specific include directive, but in addition to.