From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3BD01381F3 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:18:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C8E57E0B6F; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:17:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.cs.nyu.edu (SMTP.CS.NYU.EDU [128.122.49.97]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C696BE0A6E for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:17:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from newlap.localdomain (ool-182de1a5.dyn.optonline.net [24.45.225.165]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.cs.nyu.edu (8.14.3/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8HFHnLc003768 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:17:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by newlap.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 81DD8A006F; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:17:49 -0400 (EDT) From: gottlieb@nyu.edu To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] trouble installing cups References: <874n9kqu4q.fsf@nyu.edu> <20130917003938.0735c735@hactar.digimed.co.uk> <87fvt4p7fd.fsf@nyu.edu> <20130917102225.3eaeb02b@digimed.co.uk> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:17:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130917102225.3eaeb02b@digimed.co.uk> (Neil Bothwick's message of "Tue, 17 Sep 2013 10:22:25 +0100") Message-ID: <87d2o7pjdu.fsf@nyu.edu> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Archives-Salt: acc03743-3f41-4a92-b09a-fe627f0b47c2 X-Archives-Hash: 78e4b54ac9a5eadb75b1ebd251c1a0ad On Tue, Sep 17 2013, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 21:23:50 -0400, gottlieb@nyu.edu wrote: > >> >> So I reinstalled cups but /etc/cups/cupd.conf was not changed and >> >> still has its old date and contents. The merge looks clean (output >> >> below) >> > >> > /etc/ is CONFIG_PROTECTed. >> >> This part I knew, but would have expected to hear that config files >> have new versions > > You would if upgrading. But you are reinstalling the same version so > portage assumes you have already dealt with any config updates and don't > want to be bothered again. > > Remember when we had to go through loads of updates over again when > revdep-rebuild rebuilt a package with lots of config files. This avoids > that behaviour, --noconfmem brings it back. Understood. Thanks for the explanation. allan