From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5644 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2004 09:33:50 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 24 Oct 2004 09:33:50 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CLel4-0008Tu-6u for arch-gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:33:50 +0000 Received: (qmail 17543 invoked by uid 89); 24 Oct 2004 09:33:49 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-portage-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 31678 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2004 09:33:48 +0000 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:33:50 +0200 From: Sven Vermeulen To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <20041024093350.GB12337@gentoo.org> References: <4176E087.7090909@libero.it> <200410211030.29408.pauldv@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Conary X-Archives-Salt: 69a0c922-6cb1-4cc9-b1d3-491d67f7b379 X-Archives-Hash: dfd4620f18c4e158364788c6408e69ae --pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 10:18:56PM -0500, Ed Grimm wrote: > My issue is: Gentoo's patch system does not take current state into > account in any appropriate manner. This means that any file in /etc > which I have made changes will be updated improperly; I'll therefore > need to either throw out new changes or adapt them to my changes every > time Gentoo considers updating them. I don't think it's possible to magically update configuration files that you have altered and be able to tell you that the updated configuration file still is 100% functional. It is possible if we only support a subset of configuration parameters, store them elsewhere and merge those with a script in the updated configuration file. Some distributions use this method, and it is a major annoyance. > As an example, I'm not using the standard Gentoo partition layout. This > means that, every so often, Gentoo tries to "fix" my fstab.=20 Ignore the update. There is no reason why you should update your /etc/fstab; unless you alter filesystems or partition layouts, /etc/fstab is static. > Other files which tend to be incredibly frustrating are basic config > files. For example, /etc/etc-update.conf. Every time an upgrade > decides it wants to check on the status of this file, it decides that, > on the whole, I was mistaken regarding my choice of difference viewer, > and the various other options I specified. You can interactively merge the changes. Most of the time, you can easily skim through the changes it proposes and decide that there is no need to merge them. Wkr, Sven Vermeulen --=20 Documentation & PR project leader The Gentoo Project <<< http://www.gentoo.org >>> --pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQFBe3b+Xfqz7M26L9sRAnphAKCAN2Qy2BdUKSuqr+UnzygPz49npwCVGM7E eRjARp0W72W4CkiFis5b6w== =Db/A -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc--