Bug 29736
| Summary: | make sure the user knows to modify /etc/rc.conf not /etc/defaults/rc.conf. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Base System | Reporter: | dan <dan> | ||||
| Component: | bin | Assignee: | ru <ru> | ||||
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | ||||||
| Priority: | Normal | ||||||
| Version: | 4.3-STABLE | ||||||
| Hardware: | Any | ||||||
| OS: | Any | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
dan
2001-08-15 23:30:01 UTC
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-bugs->eric Over to eric, the latest person to take on sysinstall. On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 05:08:19PM -0400, dan@freebsddiary.org wrote: > > >Description: > > At present, users see this: > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf > # please make all changes to this file. > > That is misleading some of them. > > I suggest is should say: > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > # This file (/etc/rc.conf) now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf > # please make all changes to /etc/rc.conf. > Umm, doesn't "This file" implies /etc/rc.conf? Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Oracle Developer/DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age On 16 Aug 2001, at 11:14, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 05:08:19PM -0400, dan@freebsddiary.org wrote: > > > > >Description: > > > > At present, users see this: > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf > > # please make all changes to this file. > > > > That is misleading some of them. > > > > I suggest is should say: > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > # This file (/etc/rc.conf) now contains just the overrides from > > # /etc/defaults/rc.conf please make all changes to /etc/rc.conf. > > > Umm, doesn't "This file" implies /etc/rc.conf? To most people yes. To some, no. There is room for abiguity in the existing code. This patch removes it. -- Dan Langille pgpkey - finger dan@unixathome.org | http://unixathome.org/finger.php On 16 Aug 2001, at 11:14, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 05:08:19PM -0400, dan@freebsddiary.org wrote: > > > > >Description: > > > > At present, users see this: > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf > > # please make all changes to this file. > > > > That is misleading some of them. > > > > I suggest is should say: > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > # This file (/etc/rc.conf) now contains just the overrides from > > # /etc/defaults/rc.conf please make all changes to /etc/rc.conf. > > > Umm, doesn't "This file" implies /etc/rc.conf? If you want to see the incident which prompted my PR, please read http://www.freebsddiary.org/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=2778&t=2778 -- Dan Langille pgpkey - finger dan@unixathome.org | http://unixathome.org/finger.php On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 09:43:46AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > On 16 Aug 2001, at 11:14, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 05:08:19PM -0400, dan@freebsddiary.org wrote: > > > > > > >Description: > > > > > > At present, users see this: > > > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > > # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf > > > # please make all changes to this file. > > > > > > That is misleading some of them. > > > > > > I suggest is should say: > > > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > > # This file (/etc/rc.conf) now contains just the overrides from > > > # /etc/defaults/rc.conf please make all changes to /etc/rc.conf. > > > > > Umm, doesn't "This file" implies /etc/rc.conf? > > If you want to see the incident which prompted my PR, please read > http://www.freebsddiary.org/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=2778&t=2778 > Been there, read that. One (!) user was confused by misinterpreting "this file" as "/etc/defaults/rc.conf" while editing /etc/rc.conf. I think "this file" is enough. Are we going to increase the verbosity even more, and say: "this file, yes, this, that you are currently edited, damn, you know how it's named, yeah?"? "This file" has only one meaning, at least for me, no? :-) This is going to turn into bikeshed now. I would like to close this PR. Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Oracle Developer/DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age On 16 Aug 2001, at 18:41, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 09:43:46AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > > On 16 Aug 2001, at 11:14, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 05:08:19PM -0400, dan@freebsddiary.org wrote: > > > > > > > > >Description: > > > > > > > > At present, users see this: > > > > > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > > > # This file now contains just the overrides from > > > > # /etc/defaults/rc.conf please make all changes to this file. > > > > > > > > That is misleading some of them. > > > > > > > > I suggest is should say: > > > > > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > > > # This file (/etc/rc.conf) now contains just the overrides from > > > > # /etc/defaults/rc.conf please make all changes to /etc/rc.conf. > > > > > > > Umm, doesn't "This file" implies /etc/rc.conf? > > > > If you want to see the incident which prompted my PR, please read > > http://www.freebsddiary.org/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=2778&t=2778 > > > Been there, read that. One (!) user was confused by misinterpreting > "this file" as "/etc/defaults/rc.conf" while editing /etc/rc.conf. Yes. That is correct. That thread gives visible proof that one person was confused. That does not mean there was only one person. There will have been more. There will be more. The PR removes the confusion. How can that be bad? > I think "this file" is enough. Are we going to increase the verbosity even > more, and say: "this file, yes, this, that you are currently edited, damn, > you know how it's named, yeah?"? "This file" has only one meaning, at > least for me, no? :-) Being silly about it isn't going to improve your argument. Here is what occurs in /etc/rc.conf # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf # please make all changes to this file. The string "this file" occurs twice. Some people are mistakenly (but not suprisingly) assuming that the second instance refers to the previously named file. Face it, for us, who know what we're talking about, the above has just one meaning. But for newbies, it's confusing. The PR eliminates that confusion. > This is going to turn into bikeshed now. I would like to close this PR. Only because you're making it a bikeshed. This PR is about providing clear concise instructions to people who don't know what they're doing. And that is always A Good Thing (tm). -- Dan Langille pgpkey - finger dan@unixathome.org | http://unixathome.org/finger.php On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 11:56:54AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > On 16 Aug 2001, at 18:41, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 09:43:46AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > > > On 16 Aug 2001, at 11:14, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 05:08:19PM -0400, dan@freebsddiary.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >Description: > > > > > > > > > > At present, users see this: > > > > > > > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > > > > # This file now contains just the overrides from > > > > > # /etc/defaults/rc.conf please make all changes to this file. > > > > > > > > > > That is misleading some of them. > > > > > > > > > > I suggest is should say: > > > > > > > > > > $ more /etc/rc.conf > > > > > # This file (/etc/rc.conf) now contains just the overrides from > > > > > # /etc/defaults/rc.conf please make all changes to /etc/rc.conf. > > > > > > > > > Umm, doesn't "This file" implies /etc/rc.conf? > > > > > > If you want to see the incident which prompted my PR, please read > > > http://www.freebsddiary.org/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=2778&t=2778 > > > > > Been there, read that. One (!) user was confused by misinterpreting > > "this file" as "/etc/defaults/rc.conf" while editing /etc/rc.conf. > > Yes. That is correct. That thread gives visible proof that one person > was confused. That does not mean there was only one person. There > will have been more. There will be more. The PR removes the > confusion. How can that be bad? > Because "this file" can potentially become /etc/rc.conf.local. > > I think "this file" is enough. Are we going to increase the verbosity even > > more, and say: "this file, yes, this, that you are currently edited, damn, > > you know how it's named, yeah?"? "This file" has only one meaning, at > > least for me, no? :-) > > Being silly about it isn't going to improve your argument. > > Here is what occurs in /etc/rc.conf > > # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf > # please make all changes to this file. > > The string "this file" occurs twice. Some people are mistakenly (but not > suprisingly) assuming that the second instance refers to the previously > named file. > Clearly there's a missing punctuation here. How about this? # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf. # Please make all changes to this file, not to /etc/defaults/rc.conf. Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Oracle Developer/DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age On 16 Aug 2001, at 19:25, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 11:56:54AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > > The string "this file" occurs twice. Some people are mistakenly (but not > > suprisingly) assuming that the second instance refers to the previously > > named file. > > > Clearly there's a missing punctuation here. How about this? > > # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf. > # Please make all changes to this file, not to /etc/defaults/rc.conf. That's great. -- Dan Langille pgpkey - finger dan@unixathome.org | http://unixathome.org/finger.php State Changed From-To: open->closed Fixed in 5.0-CURRENT. Responsible Changed From-To: eric->ru I promised to commit the patch today. |
