Configuration File Convention

Richard Edward Horner rich at
Tue Aug 21 21:32:17 UTC 2007


Make sure you hit reply-all as the mailing list doesn't hijack
addresses the way many do so I'm the only one who got your last mail
(everyone else can read it below!).

I don't think backwards compatibility is a huge issue at this point.
Admittedly, this is technically release software since we're past 1.0
but I have no idea what the install base is so I guess it's really up
to Brad as the maintainer and we can just patch our stuff however we
choose (yay source code!).

I think user backups are important and I think a lot of ppl don't use
automated backups on things that change infrequently. They just run a
backup everytime they do major changes.

The one thing to make sure of, and this is more a package maintainers
thing, is that read access isn't granted to regular users on "system"
config files that might have sensitive key data in them.

Thanks, Rich(ard)

On 8/21/07, robb <robb at> wrote:
> Thanks for the response!
> My current code change uses the following paths:
>   - ~/.brackup.conf
>   - ~/.brackup/brackup.conf
>   - /etc/brackup/brackup.conf
> I like the idea of checking the CWD first, but that would not be
> backward compatible. Although I am not sure it is too much of an issue
> in this case.
> One question I have is how much control should "users" have over
> backups? If Brackup is running as a system job, is there any need (or
> desire) for individual users to perform local backups? My guess is yes,
> if a user wants to make backups beyond, or in addition to, system
> backups then they should be allowed to do so. So, let system-jobs use
> the '/etc/brackup' OR '/root/.brackup' configurations (via cron jobs)
> and let users use their home configuration. Never the twain shall meet.
> You can also specify the configuration file to use on the command line,
> and that eliminating all confusion.
> Of course the system-admin backup requires my patches to restore
> user/group permissions, but that's another post.
> If you are using the source type "SimpleFind" then all paths and patch
> matching are absolute. So far this is working out very well.
> Richard Edward Horner wrote:
> > Partially in response to Robb's request for input on path handling
> > with his filter rules (I say use absolute paths for reasons I'm about
> > to explain), I'd like to comment on the current usage of
> > ~/.brackup.conf as the default configuration file. The code handling
> > this is in lib/Brackup/
> >
> > I feel like this is less than optimal, especially since you are
> > created a default config file in your home dir if it can't find one.
> > At the very least, I think the order should be reversed and it checks
> > the current directory first and then falls back on the home dir. As it
> > currently is, let's say you're operating from a config file in your
> > local dir, cd to fix something and then !Brackup without cd-ing back.
> > Well, you just made a default config file by accident which you now
> > need to delete in order to use the one you're using.
> >
> > "Why not just copy that config file to ~/ then?" you ask!
> >
> > Well, because let's say your company has a server that a couple
> > different employees have root access on. None of them have the root
> > password but have sudo rights so that if someone leaves the company,
> > that person's login is just disabled instead of having to change the
> > root password and then disseminate the new one to everyone who needs
> > it. Well, these users are all going to have different home dirs.
> >
> > "Well, why not have them sudo bash then?" you ask!
> >
> > Well, because that's really inelegant. Perl coders are about elegance,
> > right? I mean, that's what's up with the capitol letters and
> > everything, right? :)
> >
> > But, no, seriously, I don't like the home dir thing as the first check
> > especially since a conf file is put there automatically if it can't
> > find one and I also like absolute paths because sometimes resources
> > are shared and, therefore, look slightly different to different ppl.
> >
> > Yes? No? You're an idiot, Rich? I'm really hungover BTW.
> >
> > Thanks, Rich(ard)

Richard Edward Horner
Engineer / Composer / Electric Guitar Virtuoso
rich at - updated June 28th

More information about the brackup mailing list