[Freedombox-discuss] don't sidestep /etc as configuration storage

Jonas Smedegaard dr at jones.dk
Mon Nov 4 09:27:33 UTC 2013


Quoting Simo (2013-11-04 03:46:56)
> On Sun, 2013-11-03 at 18:54 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Quoting Simo (2013-11-03 18:02:56)
> > > On Sun, 2013-11-03 at 13:38 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > > Quoting Petter Reinholdtsen (2013-11-03 09:49:24)
> > > > > In addition, we get a central and structured place to store 
> > > > > configuration for at least some of the services, but that is 
> > > > > of less importance to me.
> > > > 
> > > > It is of *big* importance to me that we do *not* move storage 
> > > > from /etc to a database: It may seem tempting to use that 
> > > > approach when needing a setup different from what the 
> > > > corresponding package maintainer offers, but since we have *no* 
> > > > administrator on our systems, our setup *must* be supported by 
> > > > package maintainers.
> > > 
> > > I am not sure what this means, package maintainers normally call 
> > > adduser/addgroup or similar, how is that a problem ?
> > 
> > LDAP is a registry.  Slapd supports using its own database to 
> > configure itself, and some other applications also support storing 
> > configuration in LDAP as alternative to files below /etc.
> > 
> > Debian packages generally store site-wide configuration as files 
> > below /etc.  That means the maintainers of packages ensure that 
> > configurations work and can be smoothly upgraded across releases of 
> > those packages.
> > 
> > It is technically possible to avoid coordinating needs for 
> > customization of configuration with package maintainers, by using 
> > another registry than files below /etc - e.g. by use of the LDAP 
> > registry.
> > 
> > That's bad! Debian packages is all about maintenance.  Sidestepping 
> > that is sidestepping the reliability of Debian.
> 
> To be honest I do not have that great faith about maintenance of 
> Debian packages, especially across releases. In my limited use I've 
> had way too many breakages of service due to Debian's "helpful" policy 
> of meddling in package configuration. The last horror story was an 
> upgrade of a system with dovecot, I was so upset I nuked Debian and 
> went back to CentOS.

So you suggest to start a project similar to FreedomBox, based on 
Centos?  Or what is your point?

My point is that when(!) we choose to rely on Debian, we should do so 
also for configuration handling.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20131104/480bf3fe/attachment.sig>


More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list