couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org>
Subject Re: why etc/default.d & etc/local.d
Date Sun, 02 Dec 2012 02:14:33 GMT
The premise of this question is flawed. Debian is a downstream. So are all
distributions. CouchDB is designed, first and foremost, to package itself
from source. That's why we create these directories for the user. Please
also note that they are only created during "make install" and they do not
exist in our source.


On 13 November 2012 00:43, Randall Leeds <randall.leeds@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Nov 13, 2012, at 00:15 , Paul J Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'd rather leave them or remove the functionality. Hiding the config
> > chain seems wrong.
> >
> > +1 on definite decisions, and +1 on keeping things as is.
> >
>
> The functionality is to pass a config directory via the command line with
> the -A switch.
>
> It would be the sort of thing where the debian package would have
> COUCHDB_OPTIONS="-A /etc/couchdb/default.d -A /etc/couchdb/local.d" in
> /etc/default/couchdb. On RHEL it would be /etc/sysconfig/couchdb.
>
> The change would be that running the couchdb start script by hand (not
> using the init script) would probably no longer assume the existence of
> these directories nor pass the equivalent switch implicitly.
>
> Again, I'm +0, but just wanted to make sure we were clear on what's going
> on. The "-A" flag is not in question. Only the implicit -A on these two
> directories and the presence of these (empty) directories in our source
> tree.
>



-- 
NS

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message