From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GZaab-0007Uu-0v for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 22:05:41 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k9GM22sn031106; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 22:02:02 GMT Received: from mailout1.igs.net (mailout1.igs.net [216.58.97.34]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9GLwAa6031646 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 21:58:10 GMT Received: from waltdnes.org (i216-58-62-224.cybersurf.com [216.58.62.224]) by mailout1.igs.net (Postfix) with SMTP id A8D4C5929 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:58:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:57:57 -0400 From: "Walter Dnes" Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:57:57 -0400 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is it possible to protect *INDIVIDUAL FILES* against etc-update? Message-ID: <20061016215757.GA14528@waltdnes.org> References: <200610121910.19727.alan@linuxholdings.co.za> <20061013163319.1c9d72c6@hactar.digimed.co.uk> <20061015044052.GB9122@waltdnes.org> <200610150906.46184.bo.andresen@zlin.dk> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200610150906.46184.bo.andresen@zlin.dk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: b15880d3-dd84-4f5b-bdbe-8254b9be7692 X-Archives-Hash: c5a11b5cc9e98eff33f1b404e7873b65 On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 09:06:40AM +0200, Bo ?rsted Andresen wrote > I suspect you don't really understand what CONFIG_PROTECT{,_MASK} is. Please > read the output of `emerge --help --config`. All the files you've mentioned > are covered by CONFIG_PROTECT in a default configuration so if they aren't it > means you've screwed up your CONFIG_PROTECT and/or CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK > variables. Otherwise it is you who overwrote those files with > etc-update/dispatch-conf or whatever you use for that. Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough. It works as designed. I did not overwrite the files, but I'm getting annoyed at having to tell etc-update "NO" every few weeks when I run etc-update. There are anywhere from 10 to 40 files to plow through. And I have a 7-year-old PIII Dell as my emergency backup machine, so I repeat the process all over again. What worries me is that one of these days I'll hit the wrong key (Y instead of N) and zap a config file. Yes, I do have backups, but how long will it take me to realize what's happened? What I'm asking for is a way to pre-emptively tell etc-update not to bother me about certain files. Zap the new version and keep the old. -- Walter Dnes In linux /sbin/init is Job #1 My musings on technology and security at http://techsec.blog.ca -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list