On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 09:52:43AM +0100, Laur Ivan wrote:
> I understand the reasoning for shell processing, but I was wondering if there
> are some serious security arguments for not using XML as config files for
> binaries...
rc scripts are normally shell scripts. it's hard to parse xml into
something a shell script can use. personally i hate using xml for
config files that could be written as a series of key=value statements.
and i can't see more complicated config files being required for
*starting* a daemon.
now if the daemon needs some hugely complicated config file, then sure,
use xml. though i must admit i've never seen a daemon that needed such
a complicated config.
xml isn't really readable by humans. it's designed to tell a computer
about data, not to tell humans about data. if you have a configurator
program, that's fine. but if you're just expecting the user to use a
text editor to config the program then i don't think xml is a wise
choice.
kevin
--
us citizen anywhere on the planet? :| election coverage:
****** REGISTER TO VOTE! ****** |: http://www.campaigndesk.com/
* http://declareyourself.com/ * :| http://campaigndesk.org/
****** REGISTER TO VOTE! ****** |: http://dailyhowler.com/
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
