Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: extension of etc-update

["Donnie Berkholz" <spyderous@gentoo.org>]

Joerg Hoh (joerg@devone.org) wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 01:52:30PM +0200, Radoslaw Stachowiak wrote:
> >
> > it doesnt in proper way, because dispatch-conf does not store md5sums,
> > but uses /var/db/pkg data for its comparision. But using it (db) after
> > installation results in md5sum lost (only md5 sums of NEW version of
> > files are stored).
> >
> > So there are two ways to do it:
> > 1. store sums regardless of portage, and compare it after installation.
> > 2. maybe, instead of md5sum, simple comparision if mtime < ctime than
> > update is allowed would be fine?
> >
> > please comment about 2) because it would be trivial to implement it in
> > dispatch-conf.
>
> ctime vs mtime would be acceptable; if it is combined with the
> trivial-merge-approach, it's probably enough for most of the mentioned
> issues.

This still appears to have this problem, unless I missed it: What if the
default is exactly what a user wants in one version, then the default changes
in the next version? You assume an unmodified config file means the user
doesn't care what's in it.

But in this scenario, the file's MD5 would be unchanged from the initial
snapshot because the file is distributed as the user desires -- yet an update
wrongly overwrites this with a change that causes broken or unwanted results.

There should be at least an option to NOT do the MD5 checking you propose.

Thanks,
Donnie

-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list