[gentoo-user] etc-update

[gentoo-user] etc-update

[Sean]

What is the best way to handle the files that etc-update states needs to 
be updated?

It displays a list of all the files that need updating, but does it 
actually put this list into a file anywhere so that I can manually look 
them over to see what the differences are?

Or could anyone suggest the best steps to proceed?

			Thanks
			Sean
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1036 bytes --]

On Monday 26 June 2006 14:36, Sean wrote:
> What is the best way to handle the files that etc-update states needs to
> be updated?

There are three competing utilities for this purpose. The official etc-update 
(which sucks and should have been deprecated a long time ago... ;) ), 
dispatch-conf and cfg-update.

> It displays a list of all the files that need updating, but does it
> actually put this list into a file anywhere so that I can manually look
> them over to see what the differences are?

This will show the new files:

# find /etc -name ._cfg*

> Or could anyone suggest the best steps to proceed?

What you should do is figure out how to use either dispatch-conf or 
cfg-update. Personally I use dispatch-conf because I learned that first and 
it satisfies my needs. I think cfg-update is superior but never bothered to 
investigate. A couple of references:

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3&chap=4
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=86622

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Alexander Skwar]

Sean wrote:
> What is the best way to handle the files that etc-update states needs to 
> be updated?

Check them.

> It displays a list of all the files that need updating, but does it 
> actually put this list into a file anywhere

Not to my knowledge.

> so that I can manually look 
> them over to see what the differences are?

Hm? When you chose a file, the differences are shown to you.

> Or could anyone suggest the best steps to proceed?

Use etc-update :) I don't understand your problem, though.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Some people pray for more than they are willing to work for.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Alexander Skwar]

Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> On Monday 26 June 2006 14:36, Sean wrote:
>> What is the best way to handle the files that etc-update states needs to
>> be updated?
> 
> There are three competing utilities for this purpose. The official etc-update 
> (which sucks and should have been deprecated a long time ago... ;) ), 

What's bad about etc-update or what's missing?

> dispatch-conf and cfg-update.

Hm, where are the advantages of dispatch-conf over etc-update? I
just used dispatch-conf for the first time, and it seems to be
very much like etc-update, but it doesn't even display the list
of files that need to be updated nor does it seem to offer a way
to accept all changes (which are left).

>> Or could anyone suggest the best steps to proceed?
> 
> What you should do is figure out how to use either dispatch-conf or 
> cfg-update.

Hm. Why? What's bad about etc-update?

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Some people pray for more than they are willing to work for.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[A. Khattri]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:

> There are three competing utilities for this purpose. The official etc-update
> (which sucks and should have been deprecated a long time ago... ;) ),
> dispatch-conf and cfg-update.

Actually all the update tools have pros and cons.

For example, looking at diffs using vim via etc-update is easier to read
than dispatch-conf. The fact that dispatch-conf can use archiving is nice
but it uses the (archaic) rcs tool to do it.

For me, seeing the diffs clearly is more important...


-- 
A
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 480 bytes --]

On Monday 26 June 2006 16:24, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Hm. Why? What's bad about etc-update?

I dislike using diff. On my desktop I use meld (all graphical) and on my 
server I use vimdiff. dispatch-update takes care of trivial merges (changes 
in cvs headers or commentaries) and changes in files that I have never edited 
automatically. dispatch-conf supports automatic use of rcs (revision control 
system) so I can revert my configs if I need to..

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 416 bytes --]

On Monday 26 June 2006 16:29, A. Khattri wrote:
> For example, looking at diffs using vim via etc-update is easier to read
> than dispatch-conf. The fact that dispatch-conf can use archiving is nice
> but it uses the (archaic) rcs tool to do it.
>
> For me, seeing the diffs clearly is more important...

Why would you think that cfg-update and dispatch-conf cannot show you the 
diffs?

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Daniel da Veiga]

On 6/26/06, Bo Ørsted Andresen <bo.andresen@zlin.dk> wrote:
> On Monday 26 June 2006 14:36, Sean wrote:
> > What is the best way to handle the files that etc-update states needs to
> > be updated?
>
> There are three competing utilities for this purpose. The official etc-update
> (which sucks and should have been deprecated a long time ago... ;) ),
> dispatch-conf and cfg-update.
>

What's the matter with etc-update? It just does it all...

> > It displays a list of all the files that need updating, but does it
> > actually put this list into a file anywhere so that I can manually look
> > them over to see what the differences are?
>
> This will show the new files:
>
> # find /etc -name ._cfg*
>
> > Or could anyone suggest the best steps to proceed?
>
> What you should do is figure out how to use either dispatch-conf or
> cfg-update. Personally I use dispatch-conf because I learned that first and
> it satisfies my needs. I think cfg-update is superior but never bothered to
> investigate. A couple of references:
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3&chap=4
> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=86622
>

I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...
I've been using it since my first Gentoo install 2 years ago and never
needed (neither bothered looking for) this other tools you mentioned.

-- 
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Teresa and Dale]

Daniel da Veiga wrote:

> On 6/26/06, Bo Ørsted Andresen <bo.andresen@zlin.dk> wrote:
>
>> On Monday 26 June 2006 14:36, Sean wrote:
>> > What is the best way to handle the files that etc-update states
>> needs to
>> > be updated?
>>
>> There are three competing utilities for this purpose. The official
>> etc-update
>> (which sucks and should have been deprecated a long time ago... ;) ),
>> dispatch-conf and cfg-update.
>>
>
> What's the matter with etc-update? It just does it all...
>
>> > It displays a list of all the files that need updating, but does it
>> > actually put this list into a file anywhere so that I can manually
>> look
>> > them over to see what the differences are?
>>
>> This will show the new files:
>>
>> # find /etc -name ._cfg*
>>
>> > Or could anyone suggest the best steps to proceed?
>>
>> What you should do is figure out how to use either dispatch-conf or
>> cfg-update. Personally I use dispatch-conf because I learned that
>> first and
>> it satisfies my needs. I think cfg-update is superior but never
>> bothered to
>> investigate. A couple of references:
>>
>> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3&chap=4
>> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=86622
>>
>
> I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...
> I've been using it since my first Gentoo install 2 years ago and never
> needed (neither bothered looking for) this other tools you mentioned.
>

I have tried the other tools and they are not any better.  The biggest
thing, no matter what tool you use, is to be VERY careful what you
update.  For me, about 95% of the stuff is fine but that 5% can keel you
or make you wish you were dead.  O_O

Dale
:-)  :-)
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 778 bytes --]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 10:59:09 -0500, Teresa and Dale wrote:

> > I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...
> > I've been using it since my first Gentoo install 2 years ago and never
> > needed (neither bothered looking for) this other tools you mentioned.

If you haven't tried them, you can't know whether they are better or not.

> I have tried the other tools and they are not any better.  The biggest
> thing, no matter what tool you use, is to be VERY careful what you
> update.  For me, about 95% of the stuff is fine but that 5% can keel you
> or make you wish you were dead.  O_O

This alone makes dispatch-conf worthwhile, because you can roll back any
changes it makes.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 3: Working vacation

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Teresa and Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:

>On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 10:59:09 -0500, Teresa and Dale wrote:
>
>  
>
>>>I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...
>>>I've been using it since my first Gentoo install 2 years ago and never
>>>needed (neither bothered looking for) this other tools you mentioned.
>>>      
>>>
>
>If you haven't tried them, you can't know whether they are better or not.
>
>  
>
>>I have tried the other tools and they are not any better.  The biggest
>>thing, no matter what tool you use, is to be VERY careful what you
>>update.  For me, about 95% of the stuff is fine but that 5% can keel you
>>or make you wish you were dead.  O_O
>>    
>>
>
>This alone makes dispatch-conf worthwhile, because you can roll back any
>changes it makes.
>
>
>  
>

Well, I make backups of etc anyway.  I just copy it to old-etc and keep
it lying around.  I ran into a blank inittab once and even dispatch-conf
wouldn't have saved me there.  I don't think it was a update, just got
erased somehow.  I'm not sure how that happened either cause I don't
even look at that one.  I just recognized what it was doing and that it
was blank.

I also seem to recall that dispatch-conf didn't keep back-ups on mine. 
I had the directory but it was always empty even after a lot of
updates.  You know of any reason for that?

Thanks

Dale

:-)  :-)
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[A. Khattri]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:

> On Monday 26 June 2006 16:29, A. Khattri wrote:
> > For example, looking at diffs using vim via etc-update is easier to read
> > than dispatch-conf. The fact that dispatch-conf can use archiving is nice
> > but it uses the (archaic) rcs tool to do it.
> >
> > For me, seeing the diffs clearly is more important...
>
> Why would you think that cfg-update and dispatch-conf cannot show you the
> diffs?

Vim diff?

-- 
A
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[A. Khattri]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Teresa and Dale wrote:

> I also seem to recall that dispatch-conf didn't keep back-ups on mine.
> I had the directory but it was always empty even after a lot of
> updates.  You know of any reason for that?

Is use-rcs=yes in /etc/dispath-conf.conf ?



-- 
A
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Alexander Skwar]

Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> On Monday 26 June 2006 16:24, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Hm. Why? What's bad about etc-update?
> 
> I dislike using diff.

Hm. dispatch-conf uses diff as well and etc-update can be configured
to use a different program.

> On my desktop I use meld (all graphical) and on my 
> server I use vimdiff. dispatch-update takes care of trivial merges

So does etc-update.

> (changes 
> in cvs headers or commentaries)

Ah, okay, that's a bit better. As far as I know, etc-update only
automerges changes in whitespace.

> and changes in files that I have never edited 
> automatically.

That's nice.

> dispatch-conf supports automatic use of rcs (revision control 
> system) so I can revert my configs if I need to..

That's also nice.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Old age is the most unexpected of things that can happen to a man.
		-- Trotsky
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 580 bytes --]

On Monday 26 June 2006 19:28, A. Khattri wrote:
> > > For me, seeing the diffs clearly is more important...
> >
> > Why would you think that cfg-update and dispatch-conf cannot show you the
> > diffs?
>
> Vim diff?

Was that a question?! diff is the default. I have used vimdiff, kompare and 
now I'm using meld. They all show diffs. Did I answer your question?

# grep ^#*diff /etc/dispatch-conf.conf
#diff="diff -Nu %s %s | less --no-init --QUIT-AT-EOF"
#diff="vimdiff %s %s"
#diff="/usr/kde/3.5/bin/kompare %s %s"
diff="/usr/bin/meld %s %s"

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Alexander Skwar]

A. Khattri wrote:

> For example, looking at diffs using vim via etc-update is easier to read
> than dispatch-conf. The fact that dispatch-conf can use archiving is nice
> but it uses the (archaic) rcs tool to do it.
> 
> For me, seeing the diffs clearly is more important...

ACK

But dispatch-conf uses diff as well, so that's no advantage of etc-update
over dispatch-conf.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
A consultant is a person who borrows your watch, tells you what time it
is, pockets the watch, and sends you a bill for it.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Teresa and Dale]

A. Khattri wrote:

>On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Teresa and Dale wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I also seem to recall that dispatch-conf didn't keep back-ups on mine.
>>I had the directory but it was always empty even after a lot of
>>updates.  You know of any reason for that?
>>    
>>
>
>Is use-rcs=yes in /etc/dispath-conf.conf ?
>
>
>
>  
>

It wasn't, it had this:

> # Use rcs for storing files in the archive directory?
> # (yes or no)
> use-rcs=no


It will be now though.  I'll try to remember to try it next time.  Looks
like it should be yes by default to me.

Thanks

Dale
:-)  :-)

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Philip Webb]

060626 Sean wrote:
> What is the best way to handle the files
> that etc-update states needs to be updated?

You provoked a bit of a debate (smile), but in case it's still not clear,
I've long used Etc-update with Gvim as defined in  /etc/etc-update.conf :

  # pager for use with diff commands (see NOTE_2)
  # pager="less"
  pager=""

  # diff_command="vim -d %file1 %file2"
  # diff_command="diff -uN %file1 %file2"
  # using_editor=0
  diff_command="gvim -d %file1 %file2"
  using_editor=1

  # vim-users: don't use vimdiff for merging (see NOTE_1)
  merge_command="sdiff -s -o %merged %orig %new"

Even if you're not normally a Vim user, this shows the diffs very clearly
& allows you to copy your personal changes from old to new versions.

Generally, always go through all the etc-updates & keep back-ups of  /etc .

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : purslow@chass.utoronto.ca
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[leszek]

Le lundi 26 juin 2006 à 08:36 -0400, Sean a écrit :
> What is the best way to handle the files that etc-update states needs to 
> be updated?

I use dispatch-conf with color highlighting
the big advantage of dispatch-conf is that you can configure it to
replace config files that you didn't modify automatically.
When i run dispatch-conf after a little upgrade when portage told me to
do so, most of the time i don't have to do anything (it saves time).

here is my dispatch-conf.conf file :

# cat /etc/dispatch-conf.conf | grep -v "^#" | grep -v "^$"
archive-dir=/etc/config-archive
use-rcs=no
diff="colordiff -Nu %s %s | less --no-init --QUIT-AT-EOF"
merge="sdiff --suppress-common-lines --output=%s %s %s"
replace-cvs=yes
replace-wscomments=yes
replace-unmodified=yes

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[David Corbin]

>
> I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...

It works great,  But the interface sucks.


> I've been using it since my first Gentoo install 2 years ago and never
> needed (neither bothered looking for) this other tools you mentioned.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Daevid Vincent]

I use Meld as well. It's outstanding.

But like you, I want to use a 'console' diff program for my remote servers
(that don't have X installed). 

I've looked for a HOWTO or quick tutorial on vimdiff and couldn't find one.
Got any pointers? I know very very little 'vi' enough to insert/delete/save
basically.

DÆVID  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bo Ørsted Andresen [mailto:bo.andresen@zlin.dk] 
> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 7:38 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update
> 
> On Monday 26 June 2006 16:24, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> > Hm. Why? What's bad about etc-update?
> 
> I dislike using diff. On my desktop I use meld (all 
> graphical) and on my 
> server I use vimdiff. dispatch-update takes care of trivial 
> merges (changes 
> in cvs headers or commentaries) and changes in files that I 
> have never edited 
> automatically. dispatch-conf supports automatic use of rcs 
> (revision control 
> system) so I can revert my configs if I need to..
> 
> -- 
> Bo Andresen
> 


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[A. Khattri]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Alexander Skwar wrote:

> A. Khattri wrote:
>
> > For example, looking at diffs using vim via etc-update is easier to read
> > than dispatch-conf. The fact that dispatch-conf can use archiving is nice
> > but it uses the (archaic) rcs tool to do it.
> >
> > For me, seeing the diffs clearly is more important...
>
> ACK
>
> But dispatch-conf uses diff as well, so that's no advantage of etc-update
> over dispatch-conf.

Sorry the emphasis should have been on the word CLEARLY.

diff output is hard to read so I use vim (which is easy to configure and
use i etc-update).

(Bo pointed out that he's used vim to show diffs with dispathc-conf too).


-- 
A
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[A. Khattri]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, David Corbin wrote:

> >
> > I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...
>
> It works great,  But the interface sucks.

What exactly sucks? Be specific rather than making some vague sweeping
statement.


-- 
A
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[A. Khattri]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Philip Webb wrote:

> Even if you're not normally a Vim user, this shows the diffs very clearly
> & allows you to copy your personal changes from old to new versions.

Vim is great for looking at diffs and copying between config files.

Anyone hacked dispath-conf to use cvs/svn (if I wanted to use rcs Id still
be using BSD ;-)

-- 
A
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Gerhard Hoogterp]

On Thursday 29 June 2006 18:09, A. Khattri wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, David Corbin wrote:
> > > I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...
> >
> > It works great,  But the interface sucks.
>
> What exactly sucks? Be specific rather than making some vague sweeping
> statement.

The interface oh well.. but what I dislike about etc-update (and  it's 
replacements afaik) is this tendency to want to restore files to their 
original state.. One keypress to many, one moment of not paying enough 
attention an whee.. gone is fstab, XF86Org or some other important file.. I 
really don't understand why the system doesn't have blabla.conf.dist files to 
fool around with and leave it up to the administator to check of changes and 
the like.. 

Yes I've been burned a few times.. and no I didn't like it..

Gerhard
-- 
Ithaka photography, http://ithaka.mine.nu/
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 662 bytes --]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:38:49 +0200, Gerhard Hoogterp wrote:

> The interface oh well.. but what I dislike about etc-update (and  it's 
> replacements afaik) is this tendency to want to restore files to their 
> original state.. One keypress to many, one moment of not paying enough 
> attention an whee.. gone is fstab, XF86Org or some other important file.

There was a patch for dispatch-conf that let you specify files to ignore,
which was useful for protecting the likes of fstab (IMO baselayout should
bot contain an fstab file, if your system is running, you NEVER need a
new one).


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Define UNIVERSE; give two examples.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[David Corbin]

On Thursday 29 June 2006 12:09 pm, A. Khattri wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, David Corbin wrote:
> > > I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...
> >
> > It works great,  But the interface sucks.
>
> What exactly sucks? Be specific rather than making some vague sweeping
> statement.

The action selection using numbers instead of mnemonics.  Use of negative 
numbers is particuarly bad.  After selecting a file to diff, there is not a 
option to "replace without prompting".

I wonder if something could be done with digital signatures, so that it only 
pestered you about files you've edited.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Tamas Sarga]

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

Daevid Vincent wrote:
> I use Meld as well. It's outstanding.
> 
> But like you, I want to use a 'console' diff program for my remote servers
> (that don't have X installed). 
> 
> I've looked for a HOWTO or quick tutorial on vimdiff and couldn't find one.
> Got any pointers? I know very very little 'vi' enough to insert/delete/save
> basically.
> 
> DÆVID  
> 

Hi,

Give a shot to vimtutor.

HTH.
Tamas Sarga
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEpEo62hT1i1vMtiURAuv7AJ9InQ3N5qhdQsZ30rRwPkvykBcLjgCglINU
4DK5NLdjbtJV8/le5H3IJUw=
=LSnX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 381 bytes --]

On Thursday 29 June 2006 23:42, David Corbin wrote:
> I wonder if something could be done with digital signatures, so that it
> only pestered you about files you've edited.

That's something dispatch-conf can do.

From /etc/dispatch-conf (note the default is no):

# Automerge files that the user hasn't modified
# (yes or no)
replace-unmodified=yes

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update

[Alexander Skwar]

Gerhard Hoogterp wrote:
> On Thursday 29 June 2006 18:09, A. Khattri wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, David Corbin wrote:
>> > > I don't see why use other tool. Etc-update works great...
>> >
>> > It works great,  But the interface sucks.
>>
>> What exactly sucks? Be specific rather than making some vague sweeping
>> statement.
> 
> The interface oh well..

What about it? What sucks about the interface? How should it be improved?

> but what I dislike about etc-update (and  it's 
> replacements afaik) is this tendency to want to restore files to their 
> original state..

Well - how *could* this be changed? I mean, those tools show the differences
between the "orignal state" (ie. the config file as shipped be Gentoo and
thus as the "OEM" normally ships it) and what you've got on your hard disk.

> One keypress to many, one moment of not paying enough 
> attention an whee..

Well - be careful. As always with computers.

> gone is fstab, XF86Org or some other important file.. I 
> really don't understand why the system doesn't have blabla.conf.dist files to 
> fool around with and leave it up to the administator to check of changes and 
> the like.. 

Because most of the times, the user expects a more or less working
system after having installed the program. That's why programs tend
to ship a basic configuration. And that's good so.

> 
> Yes I've been burned a few times.. and no I didn't like it..

I also don't like being burned. But I don't blame anyone else,
if I burn myself. It's just plain my fault and nobody elses.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Kissing a fish is like smoking a bicycle.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list