From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Pimentel <d4n1@openmailbox.org>
Subject: Re: 'sudoers' vs. 'hosts-file'
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 12:21:09 -0300
Message-ID: <13d193b7c876871f0bea7a33701cb461@openmailbox.org>
References: <87h9qaihi1.fsf@gmail.com>
	<1b1c0f64e7aed4c27e377c18a32e9974@openmailbox.org>
	<87h9q9f9nr.fsf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57471)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <d4n1@openmailbox.org>) id 1Z4WCJ-000508-Po
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:21:16 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <d4n1@openmailbox.org>) id 1Z4WCG-0007Dg-FF
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:21:15 -0400
Received: from smtp27.openmailbox.org ([62.4.1.61]:53282)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <d4n1@openmailbox.org>) id 1Z4WCG-0007DI-72
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:21:12 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87h9q9f9nr.fsf@gmail.com>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, guix-devel-bounces+d4n1=openmailbox.org@gnu.org

On 2015-06-15 09:17, Alex Kost wrote:
> Daniel Pimentel (2015-06-15 01:52 +0300) wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-06-14 09:47, Alex Kost wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> Since there is no real difference between 'sudoers' and 'hosts-file'
>>> fields (of operating-system declaration), what about renaming one of
>>> them?  So it could be either:
>>> 
>>>   'sudoers-file' and 'hosts-file'
>>> 
>>> or
>>> 
>>>   'sudoers' and 'hosts'
>>> 
>>> (I prefer the latter variant)
>> 
>> Host file is trust relationship (for example host, IP). The sudoers is
>> user/group that can use binary command as root (for example ifconfig, 
>> dd
>> and other).
> 
> I didn't meant that those files are the same, I wanted to say that
> 'sudoers' and 'hosts-file' fields of 'operating-system' record should 
> be
> named in the same manner as they are both file-like objects.  Sorry for
> the confusion.
All right :)
-- 
Daniel Pimentel (d4n1)
GnuPG (0B1A1914)
FSF (13054)