1 |
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 15:04, Phil Richards wrote: |
2 |
> I raised bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56664 |
3 |
> after a cron job was left behind in /etc/cron.daily following |
4 |
> an unmerge. I basically agree with the conclusion (WONTFIX) |
5 |
> but it got me thinking: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> Should portage have a "should be deleted" marker for CONFIG_PROTECTed |
8 |
> files? |
9 |
> |
10 |
> It seems odd that there is no indication left behind for |
11 |
> etc-update (or dispatch-conf) that a config file has been removed. |
12 |
> These tools could then offer deletion (or even auto-delete if |
13 |
> the file is known to be the one that got installed). |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Is there a show-stopper that makes such functionality a "bad thing"? |
16 |
> i.e., have I missed something? |
17 |
|
18 |
I personally would like to have the functionality in bug# 43066 |
19 |
<http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43066> implemented as an option |
20 |
to emerge. |
21 |
|
22 |
However, since I can achieve the same behavior through using 'env |
23 |
CONFIG_PROTECT="-*" emerge unmerge package' I'm not that vocal about it. |
24 |
|
25 |
Regards, |
26 |
Paul |
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |