| 1 |
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:32:54 +0100 |
| 2 |
Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Maybe my wording was a bit too harsh. But I cannot see the point of |
| 5 |
> offering the user the option of replacing his passwd/fstab/group with |
| 6 |
> one that with 99% certainty is wrong |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
It is for sure "wrong" in sense that you can't blindly replace your own |
| 9 |
file with the default one. But this doesn't mean that it doesn't worth |
| 10 |
a merge: when a change is made to the standard fstab, it often for some |
| 11 |
good reasons, like adding /dev/shm some time ago (if i remember |
| 12 |
correctly), and this is something that user must know and it is the only |
| 13 |
way to tell him (remember that people don't see einfos from ebuilds). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The problem with a .example file is that you read it once at install |
| 16 |
time, and then have no reason to open it again. Because it is never |
| 17 |
modified by user, it will be automatically replaced when a new version |
| 18 |
is available, and user won't notice that he have something to add to his |
| 19 |
fstab. So imo, all of this is not about "offering the user the option to |
| 20 |
replace his custom files", but about informing him of important changes |
| 21 |
he should apply. Now, the corollary is that this file should only be |
| 22 |
updated for changes important enough to worth a merge. (Or non critical |
| 23 |
additions should be comments only, like the floppy mount point recently, |
| 24 |
so that people who choose to ignore comments updates won't be bothered |
| 25 |
with that.) |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
TGL. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives