"brett holcomb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you blindly say update it then etc-update sure will mess it up.
on a unix-system mostly anything you do blindly, as root, will mess
up your system. and, on a unix-system, with your eyes open, that
mess can be fixed.
> Every update that etc-
--- Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a lot of talk that pops up in gentoo-dev regarding etc-update. For the
> time being, etc-update (or dispath-conf for a little protection) is about the
> best you'll get. Having said that, dispatch-conf *does* do automatic header
> and white-
On 17 Sep 2003, at 1:24 pm, Gwendolyn van der Linden wrote:
brett holcomb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, if you use etc-update on files like /etc/fstab your
system will break.
Exactly. I would vote for keeping /etc/fstab.example in portage, and
making the copying/editing part of the inst
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:24:22 +0200
"Gwendolyn van der Linden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ rest snipped ]
> I guess the above is true for several other files. Any file that is
> hard/dangerous to merge automatically should NOT be in portage, but
> provided as an example or template instead. In
There's a lot of talk that pops up in gentoo-dev regarding etc-update. For the
time being, etc-update (or dispath-conf for a little protection) is about the
best you'll get. Having said that, dispatch-conf *does* do automatic header
and white-space merging and can also be set to auto-merge files
Yes,
I replied long ago saying that I now see how to use "etc-update" correctly. Thanks
though.
Maybe now you see why I started the other thread about "etc-update". I've actually
been able to
look through the various files that need updating and feel like I need to be a
programmer to
understand
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 08:33:46AM -0400, brett holcomb wrote:
> If you blindly say update it then etc-update sure will
> mess it up. Every update that etc-update has wanted to do
> has wanted to replace my /dev/... with /dev/BOOT and take
> out my stuff and that would sure hose the system. Ot
Except for base-layout updates which seem to include
/etc/hosts but even then it was only a few!
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:37:12 +0200
Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
*agrees with brett*
if I haven't modified the file, I leave all the work up
to etc-update :) it
isn't much effort looking out fo
*agrees with brett*
if I haven't modified the file, I leave all the work up to etc-update :) it
isn't much effort looking out for the 4 or 5 files you need to worry about.
Ross.
On Wednesday 17 September 2003 14:33, brett holcomb wrote:
> If you blindly say update it then etc-update sure will
If you blindly say update it then etc-update sure will
mess it up. Every update that etc-update has wanted to do
has wanted to replace my /dev/... with /dev/BOOT and take
out my stuff and that would sure hose the system. Other
than running it through an editor manually I don't know of
anyway
You're welcome!
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 05:02:21 -0700 (PDT)
Joshua Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- brett holcomb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, I do it by using my editor (jstar) to show both
files - new on top, old on bottom. I then go through
and
After all they are almost always update
Unless it's a file that I edit and change I let etc-update
handle it. I'm not familiar with this file but if you
haven't messed with it or a program you use hasn't change
it then give it to etc-update.
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:09:51 -0700 (PDT)
Joshua Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok...
So
brett holcomb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well, if you use etc-update on files like /etc/fstab your
> system will break.
Exactly. I would vote for keeping /etc/fstab.example in portage, and
making the copying/editing part of the installation procedure (cp
/etc/fstab.example /etc/fstab; na
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 08:00:59AM -0400, brett holcomb wrote:
> Well, if you use etc-update on files like /etc/fstab your
> system will break. Also, when you modify your make.conf
> file you don't want it overwritten mindlessly. If you
> notice etc-update will remove all your changes.
etc-up
--- brett holcomb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I do it by using my editor (jstar) to show both
> files - new on top, old on bottom. I then go through and
> see what is new and then modify one of the files. For
> example, with make.conf I keep my old and move stuff from
> the new one to
Well, if you use etc-update on files like /etc/fstab your
system will break. Also, when you modify your make.conf
file you don't want it overwritten mindlessly. If you
notice etc-update will remove all your changes.
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 02:42:59 -0400
Ben Sparks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
why
Well, I do it by using my editor (jstar) to show both
files - new on top, old on bottom. I then go through and
see what is new and then modify one of the files. For
example, with make.conf I keep my old and move stuff from
the new one to the old. However, with the last baselayout
/etc/servi
Feel pretty silly now :p
"etc-update"
Was staring me in the face the whole time begging me to use it...CORRECTLY...that is..
:D
JBanks
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
--
[EMAIL PRO
Ok...
So do I goto the list when I'm unsure about differences in files that I'm unsure of.
Some of them
are common sense type differences but others I'm unsure of like "dispatch-conf.conf"
The new file doesn't have the header at the beginning and there are all sorts of
changes that are
beyond
Thanks for the replies everyone.
All the suggestions have helped.
JBanks
--- Andy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 11:30:14PM -0700, Joshua Banks wrote:
> > Come-on... No fish in the Gentoo pond..tonight
> >
> > I'm not asking for you to hold my hand. I just need some
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 11:30:14PM -0700, Joshua Banks wrote:
> Come-on... No fish in the Gentoo pond..tonight
>
> I'm not asking for you to hold my hand. I just need someone to confirm whether or
> not I'm doing
> this correctly. It seems that any time there's questions about "etc-update" everyo
On Wednesday 17 September 2003 13:49, Joshua Banks wrote:
> Just fishing here..+ acouple of questions.
>
> **
>
> "My Goal" in this posting:
> Is to learn how-to correctly manually update the files without the use of
> "ect-update".
Well, the "co
why not use etc-update? seems to save much hassle and time for me.
On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 02:30, Joshua Banks wrote:
> Come-on... No fish in the Gentoo pond..tonight
>
> I'm not asking for you to hold my hand. I just need someone to confirm whether or
> not I'm doing
> this correctly. It seems
Only thing i can say is instead of
cp new.cfg old.cfg
rm old.cfg
u could just
mv old.cfg new.cfg
Joshua Banks wrote:
Come-on... No fish in the Gentoo pond..tonight
I'm not asking for you to hold my hand. I just need someone to confirm whether or not
I'm doing
this correctly. It seems that any
Come-on... No fish in the Gentoo pond..tonight
I'm not asking for you to hold my hand. I just need someone to confirm whether or not
I'm doing
this correctly. It seems that any time there's questions about "etc-update" everyone
seems to be
"hush-hush".
I've layed out what my goal is, what I've
Just fishing here..+ acouple of questions.
**
"My Goal" in this posting:
Is to learn how-to correctly manually update the files without the use of
"ect-update".
How to do this correctly, I'm unsure of so far.
Being new I want to take the ti
26 matches
Mail list logo