Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout redefines /etc/fstab

[Paul de Vrieze]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 05 February 2004 09:13, Drake Wyrm wrote:
>
> I have to disagree completely. This is exactly why we use
> CONFIG_PROTECT and etc-update. Packages *should* install a default,
> but it shouldn't be called <config-file>.example. Documentation, such
> as a config file example, belongs in /usr/share/doc/<package>. When
> you re-emerge something, it should try to install everything it needs.
> If the destination file is in a CONFIG_PROTECT directory, Portage does
> exactly what you described (with a .cfg-XXXXX- prefix rather than an
> .example suffix).
>
> With regard to default config files: look at </etc/mutt/Muttrc>.
> Emerge net-mail/mutt, if you must. Beautiful example of the Right
> Way(tm) to write a default.

Basically muttrc is not of the same class as passwd, fstab and group. If 
you're up to it, just move the three to somewhere else and reboot. After 
that I think you can appreciate that one must not be enabled to 
overwrite them.

First the defaults for those files can not and will not give you a 
working setup. Basically when these files exist, the only way to create 
useable new ones is to base them of the existing ones. These files are 
system specific and cannot have reasonable defaults. It is never ever a 
good idea to overwrite the current version with the config-protected 
one. The only alternative solution I see would be to patch etc-update to 
automatically ignore/remove these updates.

Paul

- -- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@g.o
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAIhFzbKx5DBjWFdsRAgccAJ4nrQR3oTP5QJbe5HNxjSYR5VAJGQCgy+tI
eSJgpzFXCGoNDeVpAj8LQOQ=
=FKB4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list