Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout redefines /etc/fstab

[Drake Wyrm]

On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 09:09:38PM +0000, in <70F15952-5756-11D8-80B7-000A95795F3E@××××××××××××××××××.uk>, Stroller <stroller@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
> On Feb 4, 2004, at 8:10 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> I recall a while back there were some changes that were necessary to be
> merged into fstab; in fact mine contains the following 3 lines:
>   # added by baselayout-1.8.6.8-r1 - 5/7/2003
>   # NOTE: The next line is critical for boot!
>   none                    /proc           proc            defaults
>   0 0
>
> But aside from that, fstab and some other systems files never change; I
> always think these should be distributed as /etc/fstab.example and so
> on. The Installation documentation could be changed to say "copy & edit
> your fstab like so: cp /etc/fstab.example /etc/fstab && nano -w
> /etc/fstab`" and users would have the benefit of a back-up of the
> original should they ever b0rk theirs up.

I have to disagree completely. This is exactly why we use CONFIG_PROTECT
and etc-update. Packages *should* install a default, but it shouldn't
be called <config-file>.example. Documentation, such as a config file
example, belongs in /usr/share/doc/<package>. When you re-emerge
something, it should try to install everything it needs. If the
destination file is in a CONFIG_PROTECT directory, Portage does exactly
what you described (with a .cfg-XXXXX- prefix rather than an .example
suffix).

With regard to default config files: look at </etc/mutt/Muttrc>. Emerge
net-mail/mutt, if you must. Beautiful example of the Right Way(tm)
to write a default.

With regard to backups: yes, do backups. They come in handy, should you
ever b0rk up.

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell