a place for configuration files
fcash at ocis.net
Thu Mar 23 03:13:23 UTC 2006
On Wed, March 22, 2006 5:06 pm, Andrzej Cuber wrote:
> for the last 5 years I was using Red Hat and Fedora Core Linuxes. With
> the beginning of the current year I installed FreeBSD Release 6 on
> one of my servers. It took me about a week to setup the system but I
> am very happy with it now.
> I build most of the stuff from the sources using ports.
> What I found strange is that the configuration files of different
> services are located in two different places. Most configuration which
> was installed from the CD is located at /etc but everything what I
> built from sources is located at /usr/local/etc. Maybe this is the way
> it use to be on Unix based systems.
> In RedHat and Fedora distributions all configuration files are
> located at /etc. I am very new to FreeBSD but I found it difficult.
> After installing desired package I have
> to add it to /etc/rc.conf in order to start it as a service and then I
> have to look for configuration folder in /usr/local/etc.
> Is there any reason why the configuration files are placed in those
> different locations?
It gives you a very clear delineation between "what is part of the OS"
and "what did I install on top of the OS". In FreeBSD, there are two
separate mechanisms for upgrades: buildword/freebsd-update for the
base OS, and the many methods of doing port/package upgrades. They
can be upgraded separately, and all the installed files are put in
It keeps things neat and tidy and separate.
Nothing drives me battier than logging onto a Linux station and seeing
a thousand entries under /etc, with no clear indication of what is
"the base OS" and what are "apps installed on the OS". Everything's a
mess, and stored under /etc and /usr. Annoying to say the least.
fcash at ocis.net
More information about the freebsd-stable