Hi KP Am 15.10.2015 um 18:41 schrieb kp kirchdoerfer: > Hi Erich; > ..
> > No; we only need the new package with the AC1 and the AC', which is in > configdb.lrp. > If you call apkg -u it will detect the changed file and it will offer you to > either Keep your version, Show differences, Edit a merge file or to go with > the > new version. How can you merge if you don't have a difference > I've checked that it even works, if you replace the original package with the > new version on /mnt. Yes, that works and it corresponds to - AC, AC1 and AC' are available, because from AC and AC' we can calculate D and apply it to AC1 In my previous mail there was a typo in the condition above > > Pls test. > > So what upgrade can do is to copy the package to /mnt and run apkg -u > afterwards from /mnt. If there are changes, the user can decide how to > proceed. This was the first test I did and I did not like it. It is noisy like hell. And most importantly (at least to me) is _the user should not need to intervene_. This is because the average user has either forgotten the changes or applied them using a web interface of some sort. For example, if you use webconf to configure /etc/network/interfaces then the generated file will look a lot different from the one included in the distribution. The user may never have seen the original, how could he make an intelligent choice? Blindly just use the old configuration has it's problems, as seen before, even calculating the difference and applying it to the new config file may be error prone, but probably a lot safer than human intervention. > > There has been introduced a safety feature, that every upgrade needs a > response (y/n) , even it doesn't touch any config etc..., but if changes in > the > config are detected, you'll be offered with the menu to deal with the > changes. I messed around with apkg -u and looked at the implementation of apkg.merge and apkg.mergefile. These two scripts do nothing more than what 'diff -r' and 'patch' would do, probably just a lot slower. I would like to enable these two applets in busybox and I have done so in my local branch. Tests are encouraging. It could make the scripts a lot easier and more consistent than an implementation in bash. Any objections to enhance busybox? cheers ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
