<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/25/07, <b class="gmail_sendername"><a href="mailto:jedi@mishnet.org">jedi@mishnet.org</a></b> <<a href="mailto:jedi@mishnet.org">jedi@mishnet.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 12:50:38PM -0600, Brian Wood wrote:<br>>> Brett Kosinski wrote:<br>>> > Don't mistake the Windows registry implementation with the concept,<br>>> > itself, of a centralized, consistent (in the sense that it's a
<br>>> > consistent format with a known layout) configuration database. IMHO,<br>>> > the concept isn't necessarily a bad one. The Windows implementation<br><br> Sure it is. Once you start centralizing something you have to deal
<br>with concurrency and access control issues and the possibility that one<br>"user" will cause a general outage. It takes something that could be very<br>simple and jacks up the technical requirements because now you are doing
<br>things that are harder to manage and will do more damage when it breaks.<br></blockquote></div><br>Um... huh? How is, say, a standardized location for configuration files and their formats, along with an API to ease the construction and maintenance of said files, any different than what we have now, aside from making things sane and consistent?
<br><br>Besides, I'd love to hear how /etc solves these "concurrency and access control issues" which you allude to.<br><br>Brett.<br>