RE: Windows XP question / fragile registry

From: Kautzmann Gerd (
Date: Mon Oct 28 2002 - 13:28:26 CET

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alfie Costa []
> Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 1:15 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Windows XP question / fragile registry
> On 25 Oct 2002, at 15:29, Michele Andreoli <> wrote:
> > My heart is open. I'm not fanatic. I think registry is
> > better then /etc. But I can change idea if someone has
> better arguments.

Main Problem I see on DB/Registry for UNIX/LINUX is:

1. There must still be the flat files in /etc (and others) for
2. The flat files are just generated by the DB-Registry entries, if you
change them by hand (or with not DB-Tools) the changes are lost when you
use the DB again.
3. If the OS crashes or if the DB-Admin Tool got a break before changing the
or the flat file the DB will be inkonstistent to the data in the flat files.
This could cause 'funny' effekts, maybe you will try to add a network entry
but the DB refuses to write changes into the flat files cause it 'think'
changes allready took place. ( Once I had this effect in AIX ) I know it
is a trend in Linux / Unix to use some additional DBs for installation, but
hate to edit all the files that where replaced by Yast on my Suse Linux
evry time when I did an Update, Suse deletes / overwrites changes I had to
4. I allways wanted the Win3.11 flat files back in Windows95 Windows98 and
in former days I could 'repair' a defektive window installation by just
looking into
the *.ini files with a MS-DOS editor.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

with kind regards / mit freundlichen Grüssen

Gerd Kautzmann

*  Gerd Kautzmann
*  Software Entwicklung
*  Baumer Ident GmbH
*  Hertzstr. 10
*  D-69469 Weinheim
*  +49 (0) 6201 / 9957 15
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sat Feb 08 2003 - 15:27:23 CET