| 1 |
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 00:21:02 -0500 (EST), Daniel Barkalow wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > The issue is that etc-update doesn't have the version of the config |
| 6 |
> > file as installed by the version of the package that's being replaced, |
| 7 |
> > so it can't tell the difference between non-trivial changes to the |
| 8 |
> > config file as shipped by gentoo between the old version and the new |
| 9 |
> > version and non-trivial local modifications that I've made myself to a |
| 10 |
> > config file which has not been changed between package versions. I've |
| 11 |
> > definitely had etc-update ask for confirmation on files I'm sure I |
| 12 |
> > didn't change |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I haven't use etc-update for a while, but dispatch-conf can do this. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> # Automerge files that the user hasn't modified |
| 17 |
> # (yes or no) |
| 18 |
> replace-unmodified=no |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Whether this is a good idea is a completely separate issue. If a service |
| 21 |
> had a config file change between versions and the file was updated to the |
| 22 |
> new format while the old daemon was still running, the results could be |
| 23 |
> "interesting". |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I actually wanted the opposite feature: have an extra confirmation |
| 26 |
required for replacing a locally-modified file. And it shouldn't require |
| 27 |
all of the extra bookkeeping of dispatch-conf to get this, although |
| 28 |
dispatch-conf is clearly a lot closer. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-Daniel |
| 31 |
*This .sig left intentionally blank* |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives