[csw-maintainers] Adjusting $(DIRPATHS) for sparse zones support with shared /opt

[Ben Walton]

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Jun 17 09:47:45 -0400 2009:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:08:56AM +0200, Sebastian Kayser wrote:
> > Philip Brown wrote:
> > > Sometimes, it is DESIRABLE to have the configs globally in /opt/csw/etc.
> > 
> > Does "desirable" go hand in hand with the core notion of this thread to
> > change the default $(sysconfdir) to /etc/opt/csw? Have all configuration
> > files in /etc/opt/csw eventually unless a maintainer decides otherwise
> > for his packages?
> 
> "defaults" are usually set to be whatever is used most commonly.
> my non-quantified belief is that most of our packages that have config
> files, are/should have them in /etc/opt/csw
> If so, then the default should point to there.

I'm combining threads here, since they are of overlapping subject matter.


> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 09:08:21PM +0200, rupert THURNER wrote:
> > this does not mean that the default /opt/csw/etc goes away, isn't it?
> 
> nope.

...but, if the GAR default is changed, it will gradually become less
prominent.  Lets have a real discussion about this, weighing pros and
cons of the move from a default of /opt/csw/etc to a default of
/etc/opt/csw.

Pros:

1. A single /etc tree (eventually), and not including some of the sfw
   stuff, etc.

2. Still maintains a partition between system packages and csw
   packages that might overlap.

Cons:

1. For people sharing out a single install (possibly per $arch) with
   NFS, /etc/opt/csw may make things more difficult, although I'd
   argue that symlinks could work around this quite easily.  [For
   people in this situation, would creating symlinks for you?]

2. Potentially painful for maintainers during the transition.

3. User confusion during the transition, although I'd argue it's
   already a confusing situation.

Personally, I really dislike having multiple etc directories...it
feels wrong to me, but that is likely due to my Linux roots where the
FHS has been in place for a long time and it isn't carrying some of
the legacy aspects that make solaris attractive in other ways.  I also
dislike having /opt/csw/apache2/etc and would prefer
/etc/opt/csw/apache2, for example.

Should this discussion be taken to users@ to 'poll the audience'?

I'm curious what others think.

Thanks
-Ben
-- 
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302

GPG Key Id: 8E89F6D2; Key Server: pgp.mit.edu
Contact me to arrange for a CAcert assurance meeting.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20090618/623c053a/attachment-0002.asc>