Re: [gentoo-user] Things that can be improved

[gentuxx]

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

Rafael Fernández López wrote:
> Hi,
>
>     This is not flame war. I love Gentoo, and it is the distribution
> that
> fits me perfectly, but I've been wondering this last year what things
> can be improved in this wonderful distro.
>
>     The first thing that I'd change is "etc-update" or
> "dispatch-conf". I'd
> suggest to create some kind of tool like "dpkg-reconfigure" in Debian.
> More intuitive than reading /etc files and writing them by hand that is
> more probably to be mistaken when writing.

I do agree that these tools fall slightly short of the goal - which
IMHO it to effectively "manage" config files when updating packages,
and to "dumb down" the management process.

I've noticed that a majority of the *.conf updates (especially
recently) tend to be changing the date(s) in the Gentoo copyright
notice (from 2005 -> 2006) and/or cvs document version header updates
(e.g. v1.5 to v1.6).  I typically use dispatch-conf, so maybe this is
what etc-update calls "trivial updates".  Without going into too many
specifics (since the thread wasn't started in a specific manner), one
of my pet peeves about dispatch-conf is that the new, unmodified
*.conf files take precedence.  I know there's the "merge" option, and
admittedly, I haven't quite figured out how to use that effectively.
But if a new *.conf file is presented, shouldn't/couldn't it diff the
new with the old and automatically incorporate the differences into
the new *.conf file?

More to the point, as I'm not familiar with "dpkg-reconfigure", or
debian for that matter, why not point out specific short-comings of
the existing tools?  Or propose a better approach to solving the
*.conf file management issue (philosophically or technically - i.e.
write one)?

>
>     Second thing that I'd improve is a security one. I know that
> "emerge"
> is a very cared package, but it is a script. Suppose that someone
> commits portage with a emerge failure in its code (he forgot a comma
> !!)... if someone updates portage won't be able to update it again
> because it will fail ever and ever again... So I suggest to have a
> backuped emerge script that we are sure that worked (like the last
> emerge tool that was used), and if the new emerge tool is mistaken (so
> that user doesn't need to know python) only has to run "regenemerge" for
> example, and will have the latest emerge working tool.
>
>
I don't know if this is technically a "security issue", moreso an
availability issue (which, yes, technically falls under security in
terms of confidentiality-integrity-availability, but in my mind falls
slightly outside of the umbrella).  While you present a valid concern,
I believe this is addressed by the whole masking/testing process that
is currently architected into portage.  If a portage developer managed
to leave out a comma when doing a cvs commit, it's *very* likely going
to be found before portage is moved to the stable tree.  Worst case
scenario, if something like this *were* to fall through the cracks,
grab your trusty install-CD and revert to a known-good portage
snapshot.  Between the lists/forums/announcements/wiki/etc., I'm sure
that something like this would surface /immediately/.

Just my 2¢...

>
> --
> gentux
> echo "hfouvyyAhnbjm/dpn" | perl -pe 's/(.)/chr(ord($1)-1)/ge'
>
> gentux's gpg fingerprint ==> 5495 0388 67FF 0B89 1239  D840 4CF0
> 39E2 18D3 4A9E
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFErsVqTPA54hjTSp4RApBDAKC9nlQd45p1UkwM8nD+WGOh+ZLewwCgrX9q
DvV9ZNnD3GQjYEtd4DeCR0w=
=sguh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list