SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Sun Apr 7 23:23:38 UTC 2013
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.
@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 :-)
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.