(no subject)
From: Dave Martel (nospam@nospam123.com)Date: 06/26/02
- Next message: rhinds_nospam_@cwnet.com: "Windows Explorer is trying to access the Internet"
- Previous message: Anton Cheng: "instant messaging"
- In reply to: : "Re: The Beginning Of The End For Micro$oft Reign Of Terror"
- Next in thread: 0§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí: "(no subject)"
- Reply: 0§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí: "(no subject)"
- Reply: : "Re: The Beginning Of The End For Micro$oft Reign Of Terror"
- Reply: 0§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí: "(no subject)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Dave Martel <nospam@nospam123.com> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 12:16:01 -0700
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 03:49:05 -0700, Gerry Quinn wrote:
> In article <hi3jhuss5c99d6rqc5e3qgstcqonq4lcug@4ax.com>, Rebel Alliance
> Galactic Usenet News Service wrote:
>>
>>I haven't either, but all too many people do this because in the end, it
>>turns out to be faster than finding a solution to an obscure problem
>>that in most cases, M$ has made too difficult to fix for the average
>>person. I'm sure it would be easier for people to look through text
>>config files and find an incorrect setting, than it currently is to dig
>>through the registy and find thousands of entries like:
>>
>>E0F6F02FF8729BD4C93CDC96002ED38F
>
> Why is it easier than the same entry in a text file? The process is
> entirely equivalent: find the appropriate config file / registry key,
> and alter values as appropriate.
For one thing, Linux config files can contain comments and are very
well-documented so you have instructions right at the point where you change
the settings. For another, we have nothing to hide so we don't need to use
cryptic variable names and values like those frequently found in the registry.
For example, /etc/make.conf file from my current (FreeBSD) system:
------------------------------------------------------------------
# $FreeBSD: src/etc/defaults/make.conf,v 1.97.2.59 2001/12/06 08:41:51 sobomax Exp $
#
<snip>
#
# The CPUTYPE variable controls which processor should be targeted for
# generated code. This controls processor-specific optimizations in
# certain code (currently only OpenSSL) as well as modifying the value
# of CFLAGS to contain the appropriate optimization directive to gcc.
# The automatic setting of CFLAGS may be overridden using the
# NO_CPU_CFLAGS variable below.
# Currently the following CPU types are recognised:
# Intel x86 architecture:
# (AMD CPUs) k7 k6-2 k6 k5
# (Intel CPUs) p4 p3 p2 i686 i586/mmx i586 i486 i386
# Alpha/AXP architecture: ev6 pca56 ev56 ev5 ev45 ev4
#
# If you experience any problems after setting this flag, please unset
# it again before submitting a bug report or attempting to modify code.
# It may be that certain types of software will become unstable after being
# compiled with processor-specific (or higher - see below) optimization flags.
# If in doubt, do not set CPUTYPE or CFLAGS to non-default values.
#
CPUTYPE=i686
<snip>
#
# To avoid building various parts of the base system:
#NO_CVS= true # do not build CVS
#NO_BIND= true # do not build BIND
#NO_FORTRAN= true # do not build g77 and related libraries
#NO_I4B= true # do not build isdn4bsd package
#NO_LPR= true # do not build lpr and related programs
#NO_MAILWRAPPER=true # do not build the mailwrapper(8) MTA selector
#NO_MODULES= true # do not build modules with the kernel
#NO_OBJC= true # do not build Objective C support
#NO_OPENSSH= true # do not build OpenSSH
#NO_OPENSSL= true # do not build OpenSSL (implies NO_OPENSSH)
#NO_SENDMAIL= true # do not build sendmail and related programs
#NO_SHAREDOCS= true # do not build the 4.4BSD legacy docs
#NO_TCSH= true # do not build and install /bin/csh (which is tcsh)
#NO_X= true # do not compile in XWindows support (e.g. doscmd)
#NOCRYPT= true # do not build any crypto code
#NOGAMES= true # do not build games (games/ subdir)
#NOINFO= true # do not make or install info files
#NOLIBC_R= true # do not build libc_r (re-entrant version of libc)
#NOPERL= true # do not build perl. Disables OpenSSL optimizations
#NOPROFILE= true # Avoid compiling profiled libraries
#NOSECURE= true # do not build crypto code in secure/ subdir
#NOSHARE= true # do not go into the share subdir
#NOUUCP= true # do not build uucp related programs
#
<snip>
# By default, the system will always use the keyboard/video card as system
# console. However, the boot blocks may be dynamically configured to use a
# serial port in addition to or instead of the keyboard/video console.
#
# By default we use COM1 as our serial console port *if* we're going to use
# a serial port as our console at all. Alter as necessary.
#
# COM1: = 0x3F8, COM2: = 0x2F8, COM3: = 0x3E8, COM4: = 0x2E8
#
#BOOT_COMCONSOLE_PORT= 0x3F8
#
# The default serial console speed is 9600. Set the speed to a larger value
# for better interactive response.
#
#BOOT_COMCONSOLE_SPEED= 115200
------------------------------------------------------------------
However, it's silly to argue GUI config is "superior" to text config or vice
versa. Each has its advantages so it's all just a matter of personal
preference. But where the Windows registry removes that choice, most Linux GUI
applications use a text config file to store their settings so users can
decide for themselves wether to use the GUI or a text editor. Most of us use
both methods. If I know exactly what a setting does I use the menu. For
unfamiliar settings I prefer to be guided by the comments in the text file.
For changing a simple flag I prefer the menu again. For making wholesale
changes I find editing a text file easier than repeatedly wading down through
many levels of menus. And if I can't readily find something in a maze of
twisty little menus, I can find it quickly in the text file by doing a text
search for a few keywords likely to appear in the adjacent comments (as
opposed to searching the registry, where you have to guess what the programmer
might have named an option variable and then when you find it there aren't any
comments to tell you what its allowed values are).
- Next message: rhinds_nospam_@cwnet.com: "Windows Explorer is trying to access the Internet"
- Previous message: Anton Cheng: "instant messaging"
- In reply to: : "Re: The Beginning Of The End For Micro$oft Reign Of Terror"
- Next in thread: 0§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí: "(no subject)"
- Reply: 0§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí: "(no subject)"
- Reply: : "Re: The Beginning Of The End For Micro$oft Reign Of Terror"
- Reply: 0§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí: "(no subject)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|