LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   -current update autofs to 5.0.7 (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/current-update-autofs-to-5-0-7-a-4175457203/)

fl0 04-07-2013 04:42 AM

-current update autofs to 5.0.7
 
Hi,

-current has autofs 5.0.5, upstream has 5.0.7 with a lot of fixes.

Please update to 5.0.7

regards

GazL 04-08-2013 06:32 AM

looks like you got your wish:
Quote:

Sun Apr 7 23:23:38 UTC 2013
n/autofs-5.0.7-x86_64-1.txz: Upgraded.

Pat, the new /etc/auto.master contains a reference to a non-existing /etc/auto.master.d directory. I really don't see why auto.master would need a '.d' directory but seeing as upstream have deemed it necessary to include one in the default config file you might want to consider adding one.

(What next? /etc/fstab.d/ , /etc/hosts.d/ , /etc/passwd.d/ ? *shakes head* )

zakame 04-08-2013 07:37 AM

what is next is /etc/system.d >:D

Mark Pettit 04-08-2013 08:02 AM

@GazL - I think this is a fairly recent trend (eg modprobe.d, cron.d, dnsmasq.d, profile.d), along with some old ones (init.d, rc,d). Personally I like it. It allows one to add configuration files without mucking up a single file. My understanding is that the application reads all the files, (I assume in some special order - possibly simple alphanumeric), and combines all the lines into one big input. If something is not working, one can merely "mv" the file out to elsewhere (/tmp) until a fix is found, fix it, and move it back. Much cleaner than fiddling inside a single file. So, yes, if we get hosts.d, fstab,d, why not :-)

GazL 04-08-2013 08:16 AM

Yep, perhaps I'm overreacting there. A '.d' probably makes sense for automount: if nothing else, it'd mean I don't have to deal with the .new files every time it is updated.

I think I'd still draw the line at hosts and fstab though. ;)


edit: actually, looking at the new auto.master file I'm still going to end up editing it, so the '.d.' isn't going to help me.
Oh well.

fl0 04-08-2013 11:17 AM

thx for updating.

Mark Pettit 04-08-2013 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GazL (Post 4927492)
I think I'd still draw the line at hosts and fstab though. ;)

Ok - I'll give you the fstab. But hosts definitely make sense. Once could group whole sections into common files. I do contract work at various clients and having a separate file for each client would be nifty.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:55 PM.