| 1 |
"Interactively merge changes" does exactly that (uses diff/patch) |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Sun, Apr 13, 2003 at 04:57:20AM -0500, Brian Harring wrote: |
| 4 |
> While I'm on an emailing spree, anyone got any ideas on how to make etc-update |
| 5 |
> a bit less painful? |
| 6 |
> It seems like a lot of the times where etc-update requires user intervention |
| 7 |
> it's fairly minor- case in point, make.conf, when the default/base-layout |
| 8 |
> make.conf gets updated. It seems like it usually chokes on configured |
| 9 |
> options, features or gentoo_mirrors as an example. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> What if we were to either A) maintain a listing of default conf files (when |
| 12 |
> modifying/adding a conf file, make.conf again, store it somewhere), or B) |
| 13 |
> pull the conf from the distfile in some way? The reason I ask is it strikes |
| 14 |
> me if etc-update where able to compare the old default conf against the |
| 15 |
> current conf it might be able to create a diff it could use to patch against |
| 16 |
> the new one. A bit wordy, but basically I'm wondering if we could isolate |
| 17 |
> the changes a user has made, and attempt to merge those changes into the new |
| 18 |
> conf file via a diff. |
| 19 |
> The problem I see with this would be that where (say GENTOO_MIRRORS) gets |
| 20 |
> updated to some new default setting, the generated diff wouldn't be able to |
| 21 |
> match against the new conf. |
| 22 |
> Thoughts? |
| 23 |
> ~harring |
| 24 |
> bdharring@××××.edu |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> -- |
| 27 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Jon Portnoy |
| 31 |
avenj/irc.freenode.net |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives