| 1 |
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 12:08 +0000, Mick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 14 February 2010 11:32:12 Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 12:03:40 +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > > On a more serious note, conf-update automatically merges trivial |
| 5 |
> > > > changes, so any configs you ran at the default, which is probably the |
| 6 |
> > > > majority, won't be flaged at all. |
| 7 |
> > > |
| 8 |
> > > so does cfg-update.... |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Every now and then, someone mentions cfg-update - usually you :) - and I |
| 11 |
> > give it another try, but I don't really get on with it and always go back |
| 12 |
> > to conf-update. There's nothing specific wrong with it, I just prefer (or |
| 13 |
> > am used to) conf-update. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > I expect that if I were still using etc-update or dispatch-conf I would |
| 16 |
> > welcome it with open arms though. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> You make me feel out of touch with Gentoo! Is dispatch-conf and etc-update |
| 19 |
> that bad then? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
out of touch would be rolling your own config update tool, like me ;) |
| 22 |
It hasn't changed much since I started using Gentoo... |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
In any formula, constants (especially those obtained from handbooks) |
| 28 |
are to be treated as variables. |
Archives