| 1 |
On Saturday 28 February 2004 04:23, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday 27 February 2004 03:41 am, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
> > If anyone can see situation where this behaviour could be detrimental, |
| 4 |
> > please reply here for further discussion and add a comment to bug #43066 |
| 5 |
> > if a similar comment does not exist already. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> one already does and i just closed your bug for you :p |
| 8 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8423 |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Thanks for that. I was certain that there would be another bug regarding this, |
| 11 |
but was unable to find it. Heh, I was actually pretty sure that you'd be the |
| 12 |
one to dupe it. :) |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> you're not only going to see problems with CONFIG_PROTECT but with files |
| 15 |
> that have changed md5sums/mtimes |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I don't understand what problems you are talking about. md5sums/mtimes are |
| 18 |
still taken into account with the patch I submitted. I'm running with that |
| 19 |
patch now and haven't had any problems so far (not that I've |
| 20 |
unmerged/remerged an awful lot). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Basically, I'm suggesting that config files that have never been changed be |
| 23 |
removed as they will be restored upon reinstallation. Anything that has |
| 24 |
changed shouldn't be removed and anything that was added since installation |
| 25 |
won't be tracked anyway. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Regards, |
| 28 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives