On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 12:08 +0000, Mick wrote: > On Sunday 14 February 2010 11:32:12 Neil Bothwick wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 12:03:40 +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > > > On a more serious note, conf-update automatically merges trivial > > > > changes, so any configs you ran at the default, which is probably the > > > > majority, won't be flaged at all. > > > > > > so does cfg-update.... > > > > Every now and then, someone mentions cfg-update - usually you :) - and I > > give it another try, but I don't really get on with it and always go back > > to conf-update. There's nothing specific wrong with it, I just prefer (or > > am used to) conf-update. > > > > I expect that if I were still using etc-update or dispatch-conf I would > > welcome it with open arms though. > > You make me feel out of touch with Gentoo! Is dispatch-conf and etc-update > that bad then?
out of touch would be rolling your own config update tool, like me ;) It hasn't changed much since I started using Gentoo... -- Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au> In any formula, constants (especially those obtained from handbooks) are to be treated as variables.
