On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday 11 February 2010 22:09:28 Mark Knecht wrote: >> Can someone comment on why I do or do not want to include config files >> when making quickpkg files? >> >> Seems like there is the issue of hand edits being saved which would be >> a good reason to keep them. I'm not overly worried about someone >> stealing them and getting access to settings, but I can see that might >> be a good reason not to. >> >> If I don't save them and then after a crash want to use binary >> packages to get a machine running quickly it seems like I'd want to >> include everything I could. >> >> What would the more experienced user do for the single-user desktop type >> user? > > > The config of the package you quickpkg'ed likely works. > emerge -k is most often used to revert your own mistakes, so you want the > thing to work. Your latest configs are suspect, why insist they take priority? > You can always rename them to <name>.bak if you think they might get nuked. > > Why do you care if someone steals your quickpkgs? Put them in a directory > owned by root, they are then as safe as your stuff in /etc. To get to the > tarballs, they must get to a place where they can just read the originals.... >
Thanks Alan. That confirms what I was thinking. My comment about things getting stolen is that I might burn them to DVD for safe keeping in which case anyone can walk off with the DVD. I'm not overly worried about that and it's far and away less of an issue than getting the machine back to a running state. Cheers, Mark
