On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 09:26:16AM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 05:18:50PM +1000, Luke Mewburn wrote:
> > This would go against our prior art of not having /etc/ files
> > in base, but in this case I think that this would be a useful change
> > and I can't think of any problems with this.
> 
> I agree - while strange, this is an exception by the nature of the file,
> and moving it to base sounds correct to me.

Plus we already have at least some directories/files for /etc in other sets.
(mtree comes to mind). So this isn't that abnormal either in my mind.

James