Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Ian Zimmerman <itz@××××××××××××.org>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 17:09:07
Message-Id: 20180617170848.dby2dji7mws5oimv@matica.foolinux.mooo.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior by Andrew Udvare
1 On 2018-06-17 12:42, Andrew Udvare wrote:
2
3 > On 06/17/2018 12:17 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
4 > > What happens to files within the scope of CONFIG_PROTECT if I don't
5 > > execute dispatch-conf or any similar thingy? I have found the
6 > > confusion the latter tool generates completely unsurmountable.
7
8 > I think the side-by-side merger is very easy for small changes. Most
9 > of the time I press z because I don't need the new changes.
10
11 It's not the merge step itself (sdiff) that is confusing, it's what
12 dispatch-conf does afterward with the result. When you used it the
13 first time, did you understand what "zap new" means?
14
15 And yes, I was driven to ask this after I got an update that wasn't
16 "small".
17
18 > find /etc/ -iname '._cfg*'
19 >
20 > Or what dispatch-conf does:
21 >
22 > find /etc -iname '._cfg????_*' ! -name '.*~' ! -iname '.*.bak' -print
23
24 Thanks for this information.
25
26 --
27 Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
28 if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
29 To reply privately _only_ on Usenet and on broken lists
30 which rewrite From, fetch the TXT record for no-use.mooo.com.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>