Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-user] "etc-update" versus Manual update opinions..

[Alexander Gretencord <arutha@gmx.de>]

On Wednesday 17 September 2003 17:02, Stroller wrote:
> On 17 Sep 2003, at 1:24 pm, Gwendolyn van der Linden wrote:
> > brett holcomb [mailto:brettholcomb@charter.net] wrote:
> >> Well, if you use etc-update on files like /etc/fstab your
> >> system will break.

No it doesn't break, it just breaks if you foolishly hit "just overwrite all 
files with the new version". 

> > Exactly.  I would vote for keeping /etc/fstab.example in portage, and
> > making the copying/editing part of the installation procedure (cp
> > /etc/fstab.example /etc/fstab; nano -w /etc/fstab).
> I agree. I wouldn't be surprised if this was changed, were you to file
> it as a bug. I'm cross posting to gentoo-dev to see what they think.

I wouldn't be if it wouldn't. I would really like this to be consistent in 
gentoo. Syslog-ng has a syslog-ng.sample file, postfix has many sample files, 
many other packages don't and you got to use etc-update. Well sometimes I 
really welcome etc-update and config file merging and on other occasions it 
just sucks and is a pain in the ass. Difficult decision I'd say.


Alex


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list