svn commit: r320222 - in stable/10: etc etc/cron.d etc/mtree etc/newsyslog.conf.d etc/pam.d etc/syslog.d tools/build/mk usr.sbin/cron/cron usr.sbin/cron/lib usr.sbin/syslogd

[Ngie Cooper]

> On Jun 22, 2017, at 03:28, John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 6/22/17 4:02 AM, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jun 22, 2017, at 00:35, John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> 
>> …
>> 
>>> Please revert the breakout of the existing config files.  I think that splitting
>>> up the conf files is too disruptive of a change (POLA) for stable branches.
>> 
>>    Done in r320229 and r320230.
> 
> I haven't checked if this was merged to 11, but if so, I think they should also
> stay a single conf file in 11 for the same reason.

No, it wasn't merged to 11, so no further action required here.

>>> This was agreed to by other folks in the followup thread to the commits in
>>> head that you continue to ignore.
>> 
>> 
>>> In head please either fully split up the files or revert to a single file
>>> (another part of that thread you continue to ignore).
>> 
>>    My eyes glazed over trying to read through all of the posts. I seem to have missed the point where a proposed change was made to split up the config files further. Could this please be summarized again?
> 
> I think that having the files partially split up is the worst of both
> worlds as folks writing config management rules, etc. have to use
> different approaches depending on the rule.  I think that is a headache
> and would rather have the config either be all in a single file, or all
> be split up into conf.d/ so that it is consistent.  I also think that
> when splitting up a conf file we should do it all at once so that there is
> only one painful /etc merge instead of several of them.

This still doesn't answer my concern fully. In what way are the config files in base not broken down 100%, i.e., what action can I take to resolve your concerns about it not being fully modularized? I think syslog.conf having kerberos.log is likely the last issue, but I would really like clarification in order to move forward.

If there isn't any actionable feedback here, I'll call what's done in head "good enough", not MFC the changes, and move on to other pressing tasks.

Thanks,
-Ngie