[gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[maxim wexler]

Hello group,

Interesting discussion here:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-478783.html

What does the group think?

-Maxim

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 583 bytes --]

On Friday 13 October 2006 11:56, maxim wexler <blissfix@yahoo.com> wrote 
about '[gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf':
> Interesting discussion here:

I didn't read it, but after I heard about dispatch-conf, I set it up to use 
RCS and turned on all the auto-merge options and never looked back.  For 
me, it is vastly superior to etc-update.

-- 
"If there's one thing we've established over the years,
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh

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

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Justin Patrin]

On 10/13/06, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss03@volumehost.net> wrote:
> On Friday 13 October 2006 11:56, maxim wexler <blissfix@yahoo.com> wrote
> about '[gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf':
> > Interesting discussion here:
>
> I didn't read it, but after I heard about dispatch-conf, I set it up to use
> RCS and turned on all the auto-merge options and never looked back.  For
> me, it is vastly superior to etc-update.
>

Entirely agreed. The auto-merge feature is great as it allows you to
have configs which you haven't touched auto-updated and it keeps
backups of all of your configs if you need them (not that I have as I
check the diffs and manual-merge anything I want to keep. :-)

dispatch-conf is just a more robust and full-featured system for
updating config files. I read the first page of that discussion and it
seems most of those who use etc-update haven't tried dispatch-conf.
The rest feel they don't need the added features. IMHO dispatch-conf
should be the default for gentoo (with RCS turned on) as it would help
a lot of newbies when they make their first config update mistake.

-- 
Justin Patrin
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Mark Shields]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1420 bytes --]

On 10/13/06, Justin Patrin <papercrane@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/13/06, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss03@volumehost.net> wrote:
> > On Friday 13 October 2006 11:56, maxim wexler <blissfix@yahoo.com> wrote
> > about '[gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf':
> > > Interesting discussion here:
> >
> > I didn't read it, but after I heard about dispatch-conf, I set it up to
> use
> > RCS and turned on all the auto-merge options and never looked back.  For
> > me, it is vastly superior to etc-update.
> >
>
> Entirely agreed. The auto-merge feature is great as it allows you to
> have configs which you haven't touched auto-updated and it keeps
> backups of all of your configs if you need them (not that I have as I
> check the diffs and manual-merge anything I want to keep. :-)
>
> dispatch-conf is just a more robust and full-featured system for
> updating config files. I read the first page of that discussion and it
> seems most of those who use etc-update haven't tried dispatch-conf.
> The rest feel they don't need the added features. IMHO dispatch-conf
> should be the default for gentoo (with RCS turned on) as it would help
> a lot of newbies when they make their first config update mistake.
>
> --
> Justin Patrin
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
Been using etc-update since day one I started using Gentoo (March 2005? or
was it 2004?), it's done exactly what I needed.

-- 
- Mark Shields

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1917 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[maxim wexler]

> dispatch-conf is just a more robust and
> full-featured system for
> updating config files. I read the first page of that
> discussion and it
> seems most of those who use etc-update haven't tried
> dispatch-conf.
> The rest feel they don't need the added features.
> IMHO dispatch-conf
> should be the default for gentoo (with RCS turned
> on) as it would help
> a lot of newbies when they make their first config
> update mistake.

Yeah, I've already made my first. Now it looks like I
made a second. 

I did #emerge baselayout then #dispatch-conf. I only
edited out the last comment in dispatch-conf.conf to
enable a log file. But nothing appeared. Not in the
console or the log. I was expecting a menu to appear
listing the files to be altered and a choice of
actions. Something did happen: the hard-drive light
flickered for a few seconds. But it didn't seem to
have left its trace anywhere.

Some conf files were altered(or accessed?) but the
time stamps correspond to the emerge baselayout, not
dispatch-conf.

Well, If gentoo doesn't boot in the morning I'll be
here to complain from (ewww!) Windows :(

-Maxim

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Remy Blank]

maxim wexler wrote:
> What does the group think?

I don't know about the group, but I use etc-update and keep all of /etc
in a Subversion working copy. This allows quickly seeing any changes
made on updates and emerges, reverting changes if anything breaks, and
keeping track of the reasons for specific changes in commit log messages.

I also use a tool to store file and directory ownership and ACLs in an
SVN property. I believe dispatch-conf doesn't track ownership and
permissions.

I even thought about using a distributed VCS like git to be able to push
changes to a group of machines for e.g. updates, but then again, I don't
have enough installations to maintain. Has anybody done something in
this direction?

-- Remy


Remove underscore and suffix in reply address for a timely response.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Erik]

I much prefer dispatch-conf.  I just find it easier to use.  I find
etc-update a touch crude in the way it takes input.

On 10/13/06, Remy Blank <remy.blank_asps@pobox.com> wrote:
> maxim wexler wrote:
> > What does the group think?
>
> I don't know about the group, but I use etc-update and keep all of /etc
> in a Subversion working copy. This allows quickly seeing any changes
> made on updates and emerges, reverting changes if anything breaks, and
> keeping track of the reasons for specific changes in commit log messages.
>
> I also use a tool to store file and directory ownership and ACLs in an
> SVN property. I believe dispatch-conf doesn't track ownership and
> permissions.
>
> I even thought about using a distributed VCS like git to be able to push
> changes to a group of machines for e.g. updates, but then again, I don't
> have enough installations to maintain. Has anybody done something in
> this direction?
>
> -- Remy
>
>
> Remove underscore and suffix in reply address for a timely response.
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Trenton Adams]

I use dispatch-conf all the time.  I too have never looked back.

I use diff="vimdiff -R %s %s" in /etc/dispatch-conf.conf

NOT SURE WHAT '-R' IS now though.  Perhaps it should not be there.

Then I add the following line to my .vimrc, which allows me to press
F2 to exit the vimdiff windows in one shot.
map <F2> <Esc>:q<CR><Esc>:q<CR>

The old config shows up on the left, and the new config shows up on the right.

Press Ctrl-W and the left or right arrow key to switch between window buffers.

What I usually do, if there are additions to the new config that I
want, is copy them from the right window, paste them in the left
window, and save the left window.  Then, I hit F2, then 'z' for zap,
and my old config has the new settings that it needs.

If you don't like vim, then you might not like vimdiff.

On 10/13/06, Erik <mistereastenstream@gmail.com> wrote:
> I much prefer dispatch-conf.  I just find it easier to use.  I find
> etc-update a touch crude in the way it takes input.
>
> On 10/13/06, Remy Blank <remy.blank_asps@pobox.com> wrote:
> > maxim wexler wrote:
> > > What does the group think?
> >
> > I don't know about the group, but I use etc-update and keep all of /etc
> > in a Subversion working copy. This allows quickly seeing any changes
> > made on updates and emerges, reverting changes if anything breaks, and
> > keeping track of the reasons for specific changes in commit log messages.
> >
> > I also use a tool to store file and directory ownership and ACLs in an
> > SVN property. I believe dispatch-conf doesn't track ownership and
> > permissions.
> >
> > I even thought about using a distributed VCS like git to be able to push
> > changes to a group of machines for e.g. updates, but then again, I don't
> > have enough installations to maintain. Has anybody done something in
> > this direction?
> >
> > -- Remy
> >
> >
> > Remove underscore and suffix in reply address for a timely response.
> >
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Erik
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Steve Evans]

On Saturday 14 October 2006 06:21, Trenton Adams wrote:
> I use dispatch-conf all the time.  I too have never looked back.
>
> I use diff="vimdiff -R %s %s" in /etc/dispatch-conf.conf
>
> NOT SURE WHAT '-R' IS now though.  Perhaps it should not be there.
>

-R tells vim to be read only, so you cannot edit the files. It is probably a 
sensible option in this case.

> Then I add the following line to my .vimrc, which allows me to press
> F2 to exit the vimdiff windows in one shot.
> map <F2> <Esc>:q<CR><Esc>:q<CR>
>

A more general version would be:

map <F2> <Esc>:qa<CR>

as :qa quits all buffers, so it could be used to exit from vim with any number 
of open buffers.

Steve
-- 

2.6.17-gentoo-r8 Genuine Intel(R) CPU           T2300  @ 1.66GHz GNU/Linux

 12:32:08 up 22 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.07, 0.08, 0.08

It'll be a nice world if they ever get it finished.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Trenton Adams]

On 10/14/06, Steve Evans <stevee@gorbag.com> wrote:
> On Saturday 14 October 2006 06:21, Trenton Adams wrote:
> > I use dispatch-conf all the time.  I too have never looked back.
> >
> > I use diff="vimdiff -R %s %s" in /etc/dispatch-conf.conf
> >
> > NOT SURE WHAT '-R' IS now though.  Perhaps it should not be there.
> >
>
> -R tells vim to be read only, so you cannot edit the files. It is probably a
> sensible option in this case.

Oh yes, that brings back memories.  I had forgotten that vimdiff
passes most arguments to vim.

>
> > Then I add the following line to my .vimrc, which allows me to press
> > F2 to exit the vimdiff windows in one shot.
> > map <F2> <Esc>:q<CR><Esc>:q<CR>
> >
>
> A more general version would be:
>
> map <F2> <Esc>:qa<CR>
>
> as :qa quits all buffers, so it could be used to exit from vim with any number
> of open buffers.

When I created it, I was thinking of how to quit both buffers.  Never
thought of looking for a quit *all*. :)  Thanks.

>
> Steve
> --
>
> 2.6.17-gentoo-r8 Genuine Intel(R) CPU           T2300  @ 1.66GHz GNU/Linux
>
>  12:32:08 up 22 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.07, 0.08, 0.08
>
> It'll be a nice world if they ever get it finished.
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[David Grant]

On 10/13/06, Remy Blank <remy.blank_asps@pobox.com> wrote:
> maxim wexler wrote:
> > What does the group think?
>
> I don't know about the group, but I use etc-update and keep all of /etc
> in a Subversion working copy. This allows quickly seeing any changes
> made on updates and emerges, reverting changes if anything breaks, and
> keeping track of the reasons for specific changes in commit log messages.
>
> I also use a tool to store file and directory ownership and ACLs in an
> SVN property. I believe dispatch-conf doesn't track ownership and
> permissions.
>
> I even thought about using a distributed VCS like git to be able to push
> changes to a group of machines for e.g. updates, but then again, I don't
> have enough installations to maintain. Has anybody done something in
> this direction?

Great idea to use SVN. RCS on it's own is a pain to deal with.


-- 
David Grant
http://www.davidgrant.ca
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 13 October 2006 18:56, maxim wexler wrote:
> Hello group,
>
> Interesting discussion here:
>
> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-478783.html
>
> What does the group think?
>
> -Maxim
>

I am not 'the group' but I am using etc-update. It is all that I need. I tried 
dispatch-conf once and it was way to much work to get it work back then. 

Why? No need for that. etc-update covers all my needs - I don't have stupid 
fingers...
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] etc-update vs dispatch-conf

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 479 bytes --]

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 11:46:16 +0200, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:

> Why? No need for that. etc-update covers all my needs - I don't have
> stupid fingers...

My fingers aren't stupid, but they can be downright disobedient at
times :(

I prefer dispatch-conf, but not for the RCS feature, rdiff-backup backs
up /etc every hour anyway, but because it just seems to work better. for
me.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If at first you don't succeed, you must be a programmer.

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