> We have a change request for Bacula on FreeBSD:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/170882
>
> That is: all the Bacula stuff which normally fits in /usr/local/etc/
> into /usr/local/etc/bacula
>
> On the first upgrade to this changed port, your stuff would break.  :)
> You'd need to move your configuration files.
>
> For bacula client, this is:
>
> etc/bconsole.conf.new
> etc/bacula-fd.conf.new
>
> For bacula server, this is:
>
> $ grep etc /var/db/pkg/bacula-server-5.2.12/+CONTENTS
> etc/bacula-barcodes.samples
> etc/bacula-sd.conf.new
> etc/bacula-dir.conf.new
>
> But, depending on the options selected, there might be a few more
> files.
>
> Discuss.  :)

I already did this myself on my FreeBSD boxes when I saw all the bacula example
files, in addition to my own various test files. I'm in favor of the change, so
long as there is an entry in UPDATING and maybe a verbose console warning when
building/installing bacula.

This is no different than other software that claims its own directory in
/usr/local/etc. e.g: apache22, hal, pulse, ejabberd, etc. Perhaps as more
example config files are included and created by users for testing, it would
reduce clutter. (That's why I did it on my systems.) It would also make it more
consistent with other *nix flavors.

If the change does not occur, that's fine too, I'll simply continue to do it on
my own. It's a small change so there will probably be many bike shed color
arguments but I'm happy either way.

My 2 cents.
-Modulok-

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612 
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users