Re: [gentoo-dev] Some suggestions

[William Kenworthy]

Please dont suggest splitting make.conf - its a crap idea and we'll end
up with a mess like like conf.d (where it is justified, but its still a
mess - and an ongoing pain).  You get files changing, adds and deletions
that happen and you are not aware of the changes.

 For instance, how many people missed the addition of hdparm to conf.d? 
There have been a number of disastrous events where wholesale changes
have occurred when they were not intended: modules.autoconf was
particularly bad (I ended up with 3 dead systems), as was the symlink to
the php config file from mod_php and php proper.  At least if you have
one file, you only have one place to look.  Plus it makes sense to keep
all related information on one file, not piecemeal.

What this will mean, is that after every emerge problem, you will have
to find and check dozens of files, not one core file.

And think of the newbie, gentoo is becoming very complex to understand.

Another point is I run 3 make.conf's on a laptop, and load the one
applicable to the site I am at automatically (actually sed the file).  I
would have to parse a number of files instead of just one.

I think perhaps make.conf would be better named emerge.environment or
gentoo.environment to underscore its function and importance!

BillK

On Tue, 2003-09-09 at 23:11, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 11:57, Nathaniel wrote:
> > 1. etc-update should check modify dates and overwrite if not modified.
>
> I think everyone can agree on this one.
>
> > 2. Part of the problem is that make.conf has so many options (ie. its a
> > large file.)  What if we split it up into smaller files... Something
> > like:
> >
> >


--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list