About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Wed 02 Mar 2005 - 20:44:40 GMT

On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 03:22:47PM -0500, Paul S. Gumerman wrote:

apologies for reordering ...

> Can anyone shed any light on this?

first, I have to state that I actually belong to the all
in one file camp, and if I would have written/designed
the tools they would use a single file for each vserver

that said, the decision was made by the developer of those
(new) tools, and I'd say it wasn't done lightly ...

> I know I must be missing some wonderful new capability this provides,
> because I can't see any benefit from the complexity.

out of the box I see a bunch of advantages ...

 - default configuration for a whole site of vservers
   (could also be solved/done via includes)
 - links into the filesystem are easily handled
   (e.g. vserver dir or repostory ...)
 - parts of the configuration can be easily copied
 - tools do not need to parse stuff which isn't of
   any interest to them (e.g. network related tools
   just look at the network files)
 - ask enrico for more of them ... ;)

> Or possibly there's some simple way to manage the configuration data
> that I don't know about.

I hope that there will be soon, and I'd suggest the
following way to do it ...

 - add some vserver <name> config ... command, which
   allows to change the various aspects of a vserver
   configuration (one by one or all together at once)
 - add a vserver <name> clone ... which allows to make
   a copy from a template and change various aspects
   of the configuration 'on-the-fly'

> Daniel -- thanks for the script. I'll give it a try.
> OK, so now I can *see* it in one place, but I still can't manage it.

what I don't understand here is: if I would really care
that much about a single file 'editable' version for
each vserver (or better subtree), I'd written a simple
script which converts the directory tree into some kind
of property list, and back ... this way everybody could
use the config he really prefers, but obviously it's not
that important for linux-vserver folks, because otherwise
I'd received a bunch of such scripts ...

just my opinion,

> --Paul
> Daniel Hokka Zakrisson wrote:
> >Paul S. Gumerman wrote:
> >
> >>As a new user I'm hesitant to barge in like this, but I feel strongly
> >>on this issue. I have to say that the new configuration, with it's
> >>staggering number of subdirectories, is TERRIBLE to use. I don't
> >>understand what drove the decision to go this way ... there is an
> >>enormous value in being able to see all the configuration information
> >>in ONE place, at ONE time, and a real cost to not being able to do so.
> >
> >
> >find /etc/vservers/<vserver> ! -type d | { while read FILE; do echo
> >$FILE:; test -L $FILE && readlink $FILE || cat $FILE; echo; done }
> >;-)
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Vserver mailing list
> Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
> http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
Vserver mailing list

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view
[Next/Previous Months] [Main vserver Project Homepage] [Howto Subscribe/Unsubscribe] [Paul Sladen's vserver stuff]
Generated on Wed 02 Mar 2005 - 20:45:00 GMT by hypermail 2.1.3