| 1 |
On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 09:40:23AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 29 February 2004 03:46, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sat, 2004-02-28 at 02:55, Stuart Herbert wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > I agree with Jason - a config file that hasn't been modified shouldn't be |
| 5 |
> > > config-protected. No information is lost when the file is removed, and |
| 6 |
> > > if a Gentoo user has edited the file, it'll get picked up because of the |
| 7 |
> > > change in timestamp and md5sum. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > It should be left. Consider this case: |
| 10 |
> > $ emerge packageA |
| 11 |
> > /etc/services is modified to contain a reference for packageA |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > $ emerge packageB |
| 14 |
> > /etc/services is modified to contain a reference for packageB |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > $ emerge unmerge packageB |
| 17 |
> > say good bye to /etc/services |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Not true unless package b happened to _OWN_ /etc/services. And, if that is the case, how did package a make the odification to /etc/services in the situation above since it wouldn't have been there yet? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> I don't have any packages owning /etc/services. It may be that I don't have |
| 22 |
> any packages installed that have modified it, but I believe it's because |
| 23 |
> packages that modify it do so in either pkg_postinst() or pkg_config(). |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
/etc/services, according to my system, is owned by baselayout. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I think the change that Jason is suggesting is that if you unmerge a package, it could delete files in /etc that it owns and that haven't been changed since the package was installed. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
So, if package a is installed, and there is a file /etc/a.conf that is owned by package a and is never changed by the user, why does it need to stay around when package a is unmerged? I guess I'm missing the problem with this arrangement also. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
William |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives