Tim: >> When this, and system-config-bind updated, I found this problem: >> >> ll /etc/named.conf* >> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 32 Dec 20 16:15 /etc/named.conf -> /var/named/chroot/etc/named.conf >> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 32 Oct 27 12:36 /etc/named.conf.rpmsave -> /var/named/chroot/etc/named.conf >> >> Shouldn't the last one link to "named.conf.rpmsave"? For a moment I >> thought I'd lost my customised version of named.conf. Luckily it was >> still there, just not where I expected to find it. Tony Nelson: > Well, the .rpmsave files are just made by mv'ing the old file out of > the way so it doesn't get clobbered. If a "file" is really a soft > link, it will still point to the same path it used to point to, as it > hasn't been changed. What you have with the .rpmsave files is a way > to compare old and new, and a way to back out of difficulty if you > need to, not some parallel working installation. I know what the RPMSAVE copies are for, I'm not sure if you noticed what I listed. The /etc/named.conf.rpmsave file is really a link to the chrooted named.conf file. It doesn't link to the chrooted named.conf.rpmsave file. i.e. I reckon that it should have done things like this (below), not like how it actually did it (above). ll /etc/named.conf* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 32 Dec 20 16:15 /etc/named.conf -> /var/named/chroot/etc/named.conf lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 32 Oct 27 12:36 /etc/named.conf.rpmsave -> /var/named/chroot/etc/named.conf.rpmsave Notice a slight difference? If they're going to bother to put symlinks in the /etc/ directory, they ought to do so in a logical fashion. -- Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists.
