| 1 |
David Sankel wrote: |
| 2 |
> I was afraid that it wouldn't be clear what I meant by this. I am not |
| 3 |
> suggesting that all files could be automatically overwritten, only files |
| 4 |
> that were not modified from the default by the user. For example the |
| 5 |
> file: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> /etc/X11/chooser.sh |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> was never changed by a given user on a given system. It is the default for |
| 10 |
> the version they have. When a revision to the default is discovered, the |
| 11 |
> system will flag that file as being one that the user hasn't specialized. |
| 12 |
> In etc-update, there could be an option to update all flagged files |
| 13 |
> automatically. Does that make more sense? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I submit that this is a good idea - if the MD5 hash of a particular file |
| 16 |
hasn't changed, allow the user the option (I must emphasize _option_) of |
| 17 |
having etc-update automatically overwrite the file with the changes; |
| 18 |
with the usual disclaimer about how this could/would/will affect the |
| 19 |
functionality in a possibly unpredictable mannar and may cause more harm |
| 20 |
than good, etc. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I personally find it aggravating when I update a long-overdue system |
| 23 |
(which can be as little as 2 months with Gentoo's expedient updates) and |
| 24 |
having to plough through ~250 files with etc-update - atleast half of |
| 25 |
which I've never touched / couldn't care less about. Granted, there is a |
| 26 |
"-3 - update all remaining files" option, but that's still tedious. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Stewart Honsberger |
| 30 |
http://www.snerk.org/ |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives