Re: [PATCH] Remove absolute paths from gpg.rc
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 04:59:20PM +0100, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 03:35:18PM +0000, Dave wrote:
> > How about runtime options having two shadow compile-time options,
> > default-blah and force-blah? Normally, a sysadmin would only set
> > default-blah options (or none at all, ideally), but when a sysadmin
> > decides to pursue the boobietrap approach, he still has the option of
> > setting force-blah options.
>
> > How does that sound?
> >
> like KDE's kiosk framework, only less flexible. :)
> not sure it actually *is* - it just sounds like that. :)
> keywords are kconfig and immutable.
I know nothing about KDE, except that takes a lot longer to load than ratpoison.
Based on the names of the keywords you quoted, it sounds like my proposal is at
least similar to the kiosk framework, and is probably less flexible (and is
probably a lot simpler to implement, and definitely carries fewer dependencies).
At this point, I think UNIX lacks a useful configuration system for user
applications. I think both KDE and Mutt (as well as many other programs) might
benefit from such a system. Of course, this is the wrong list to discuss the
future of UNIX, but we can certainly implement something simple for Mutt in the
interim, or work out some way of importing kiosk from KDE, which I suspect is a
nontrivial task.
> i won't comment on the applicability or even usefulness of such a
> framework for mutt ...
That's your own choice. If you simply don't want to waste list BW, I'd be
curious about your opinion via direct mail, though. (My From: address is valid,
but you can get higher priority by using dave at my domain instead.)
- Dave