RE: [gentoo-dev] etc-update

Re: make.conf, though, what about having portage automatically merge
uncommented make.conf settings, or at least the USE and CFLAGS?  Given that
they're in the file as a way for the user to override settings in
make.globals, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me to have them overwritten
and commented out every time make.conf is updated.  Granted, it's not a huge
inconvenience to merge by hand using etc-update, but I groan every time I
see make.conf pop up when I know the only thing I need to keep are the USE,
CFLAGS and MIRRORS settings.

-Steve


-----Original Message-----
From: Alain Penders [mailto:alain@g.o] 
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RE: [gentoo-user] etc-update

Splitting config files in sections is useless, we can't dictate how other 
application developers should structure or load configuration files.


On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:31:23AM -0800, Balaji Srinivasan wrote:
> One way these conflicts could be reduced is by separating out sections in
> config files that will most probably be modified by the user and those
which
> are not. For example the USE directive and the CFLAGS directive from
> make.conf could be moved to a separate file. That way whenever portage
> changes, they wouldnt need to update those flags (or even if they did it
> would be easy to merge). This is in ofcourse be in addition to having a
way
> for the user to indicate which files he is interested in and hence those
> files should not be auto updated. Also maintaining a history of updates in
a
> separate directory would also
> help. This way in case things do go wrong we still have access to the old
> files.
>


--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list