3 ms·
The file is a standard, but the contents are not. For the most part, that makes sense, but it would be nice if there were a few standards there. Eg, DISABLE_ALL
by jsight 13y ago
The file is a standard, but the contents are not. For the most part, that makes sense, but it would be nice if there were a few standards there. Eg, DISABLE_ALL_SERVICES=true|false. :)
More examples here: http://serverfault.com/questions/526075/fixing-services-that-have-been-disabled-in-etc-default-with-puppet http://serverfault.com/questions/526075/fixing-services-that...
As it is, figuring out exactly how to do this has to be done for each service. It's tedious, IMO, though I understand the history of why this is the case.
- sciurus 13y agoSure, I can see the value in making service configuration more standard. E.G. after getting over the learning curve I've found working with systemd more pleasant than SysVinit. I disagree that this is currently really more of a problem on Debian/Ubuntu that it is on Red Hat. E.G. If I want to manage BIND via puppet on Red Hat, I'm going to have to care about /etc/sysconfig/named.