| 1 |
Yannick, |
| 2 |
I appreciate your argument, but you can't equate a start-up script with |
| 3 |
a binary. Yes, the binary is critical but it isn't likely to be |
| 4 |
custom-altered like a start-up script might be. If I emerge package, I |
| 5 |
expect the binaries to be altered. If I created a customer rc script, |
| 6 |
then I want to be the one to clobber it, not have the emerge clobber it. |
| 7 |
This whole argument may well be irrelevant anyway. If you want to have |
| 8 |
the scripts clobbered, then feel free to export CONFIG_PROTECT="". It |
| 9 |
seems to be very nicely flexible in this fashion -- more of the genius |
| 10 |
of the portage system. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Ric |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
On Mon, 2002-03-11 at 14:32, Yannick Koehler wrote: |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Actually I think it's even worse treating those files as config. |
| 19 |
> Because new users, the one that you always want to get in a distro may |
| 20 |
> be running pretty old script as they may not be aware on how to do the |
| 21 |
> merge step manually. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I suspect your argument falls down here. New users more than likely |
| 25 |
haven't altered any of the scripts there and as a result, they may be |
| 26 |
able to unprotect the system when they do an emerge. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Bottom line is, it seems to be up to the individual user. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Ric |
Archives