stupid question about etc/profile.d

Archaic archaic at linuxfromscratch.org
Sun Dec 19 21:29:21 PST 2004


On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 12:08:17PM +0000, Jeremy Henty wrote:
> 
> I thought the reason for /etc/profile.d was to make it easier to
> manage software packages that need to change the environment.

Correct.

> This is great for running a "plug'n'play" distro, but it goes against
> the principle of "I want to know exactly how my system is configured
> and understand why it has to be configured that way", which is
> something I really like about LFS.

Please explain (in specific detail) how entering text into one config
file versus another somehow lessens your understanding of why something
is configured a certain way? I'd really like to know, because you have
completely baffled me here. :-|

-- 
Archaic

I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution
which grant[s] a right to Congress of expending, on objects of
benevolence, the money of their constituents.

- James Madison, 1794




More information about the blfs-support mailing list