From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-123430-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1QRIyr-0002Mf-5k
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 May 2011 07:03:09 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EEB5A1C0A1;
Tue, 31 May 2011 07:01:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com (mail-qy0-f174.google.com [209.85.216.174])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA59D1C0A1
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 31 May 2011 07:01:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by qyk7 with SMTP id 7so1093294qyk.19
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 31 May 2011 00:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=PzG+XrHfYD+T3T9wa/3Z/aGIphAMBGeywAaZ+vmnfbQ=;
b=Nd1oTtTAd3Sab0vIlR0mPcudgyZRZ5WDAIZmx868AYvcpcfbAQ3RhBocrkHd3HtNxS
jFh4OjhYfiHRFWmk2sXRIPf8vaHlcWWHeYfkMKPOkiHChFivKqoc7cQ3XdL1YuC+Xrb8
lYuX1QGaenmlGGMWsw6IGh2j7rjf6TbjHofwI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type;
b=kxRKwzu30eOAZEYL2f2Ql7OeNMfgz45PoQAbd0bNg0ZZWD3OX41BcSj47j0FY7q+tq
C6jnUR5nik6NriB/UMVQyj2toK9YcHnHOcgW8/nW1KYgEZEDuqXg1Heu4bykCz9Cap3l
P8zRTSM3qKAP5kAmrmfNVvho7wBznfq9o1698=
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.68.138 with SMTP id v10mr3929273qci.204.1306825308192;
Tue, 31 May 2011 00:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.231.83 with HTTP; Tue, 31 May 2011 00:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.231.83 with HTTP; Tue, 31 May 2011 00:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimi+22ttK-PNtL=d34uu7qPG+Fydw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <gYf4B-3WW-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
<gYf4B-3WW-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
<gYf4B-3WW-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
<gYf4B-3WW-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
<gYf4B-3WW-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
<gYf4B-3WW-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
<gYgal-5KW-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
<20110530230808.41ecb29a@karnak.local>
<BANLkTimi+22ttK-PNtL=d34uu7qPG+Fydw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 09:01:48 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTimDkBb4tL59HEEofYUtUvrXgybDAw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
From: Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin@googlemail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f7ccaa47418904a48cfa04
X-Archives-Salt:
X-Archives-Hash: f1d04e5c050c34a7496c9de8a9d7fea0
--001485f7ccaa47418904a48cfa04
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cfg-update has such a logic. It looks for user changes, If there are
decisions to make at all and previous decisions.
Ihatethespellcheckerofmyphone.
Am 31.05.2011 08:49 schrieb "Alan McKinnon" <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>:
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:08 AM, David W Noon <dwnoon@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 May 2011 21...
The logic appears to be that an unmodified file will be re-instated
as-is should the package be re-merged, so nothing changes. A modified
config file is more problematic - if the package is re-merged, which
version should be used? The old one or the new vanilla one? Presumably
the user modified the file last time round for a reason and that
reason might still be valid.
Only one sensible choice remains - present both files to the human
user and ask them to decide.
If memory serves, this is in some doc somewhere, I know I read it long
ago but don't remember where.
--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--001485f7ccaa47418904a48cfa04
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p>Cfg-update has such a logic. It looks for user changes, If there are dec=
isions to make at all and previous decisions.<br></p>
<p>Ihatethespellcheckerofmyphone.<br>
</p>
<p><blockquote type=3D"cite">Am 31.05.2011 08:49 schrieb "Alan McKinno=
n" <<a href=3D"mailto:alan.mckinnon@gmail.com">alan.mckinnon@gmail.=
com</a>>:<br><br><p><font color=3D"#500050">On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:0=
8 AM, David W Noon <<a href=3D"mailto:dwnoon@ntlworld.com">dwnoon@ntlwor=
ld.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Mon, 30 May 2011 21...</font></p>The logic appears to be that an un=
modified file will be re-instated<br>
as-is should the package be re-merged, so nothing changes. A modified<br>
config file is more problematic - if the package is re-merged, which<br>
version should be used? The old one or the new vanilla one? Presumably<br>
the user modified the file last time round for a reason and that<br>
reason might still be valid.<br>
<br>
Only one sensible choice remains - present both files to the human<br>
user and ask them to decide.<br>
<br>
If memory serves, this is in some doc somewhere, I know I read it long<br>
ago but don't remember where.<br>
<font color=3D"#888888"><br>
<br>
--<br>
Alan McKinnon<br>
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></p>
--001485f7ccaa47418904a48cfa04--