Re: ITP: diskless for NFS-ROOT tree structures.
On Mon, 14 Jun 1999, Brian May wrote:
>>Hello all,
>
>I have previously posted this, but now I am an official Debian
>maintainer (well... mostly), I thought I should repost a formal ITP -
>Intentions to Takeover Planet ;-).
Please do so. I think that you will make a good planetary ruler!
>There is one issue I am not 100% sure of - currently I use my own
>file format, called "mbp" which is parsed to include the correct
>configuration information in each /etc file for each host.
>
>However, I don't particularly like this nonstandard format - although it
>might be slightly simpler then m4, my prefence is to replace everything
>with m4, as this should allow for unlimited expansion. I am not sure if
>calling m4 will be slower or faster then directly calling a perl library
>from perl code. What do others think about this????
M4 sounds good to me.
>It doesn't return an error code when something serious goes wrong.
>Should I file a bug against m4?
Well there doesn't seem to be anything in the documentation indicating that it
will return non-zero at any time other than when you use M4exit(). So I guess
it wouldn't be considered a bug but a missing feature.
--
I am in London and would like to meet any Linux users here.
I plan to work in London until April and then move to another
place where the pay is good.
Reply to: