From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 9 19:58:32 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE9AF16A4CE; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 19:58:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from srv01.sparkit.no (srv01.sparkit.no [193.69.116.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C29143D3F; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 19:58:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from eivind@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ws.nada ([193.69.114.88]) by srv01.sparkit.no (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i99JwOjd056154; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 21:58:24 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from eivind@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ws.nada (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ws.nada (8.12.9/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i99Js7Et003632; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 19:54:07 GMT (envelope-from eivind@ws.nada) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by ws.nada (8.12.9/8.12.10/Submit) id i99Js7gx003631; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 19:54:07 GMT (envelope-from eivind) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 19:54:06 +0000 From: Eivind Eklund To: Makoto Matsushita Message-ID: <20041009195406.GE1737@FreeBSD.org> References: <20041010011818G.matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org> <20041009182245.GB1737@FreeBSD.org> <20041010034658O.matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041010034658O.matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: What we keep under /etc X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 19:58:32 -0000 On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 03:46:58AM +0900, Makoto Matsushita wrote: > Please consider what FreeBSD users think, not us -- they usually > change /etc files directly (not using CVS or revision control system, > nor making a diff against the original), updating the world from a new > source code _not_ so many times, read written documentation (not > Makefile nor code itself), ... IMHO for those users, updating /etc > files without any warnings could lead a panic, so we must avoid it as > we can. We are in perfect agreement here. And note that the reason I consider mergemaster to be too broken to be mandatory is that users *do* upgrades seldom - and in that setting, mergemaster is exceedingly painful to use, because there are so many differences. > For my understandings, that's why mergemaster(8) (or "check and help > updating /etc files" tool) is there. If mergemaster(8) behaves badly, > we can fix it -- not changing what "make installworld" does. We are in perfect agreement here. (Except possibly for the "can fix mergemaster", but we can with enough pressure on the maintainer.) > > Since mergemaster(8) is considered as a mandatory tool for admin (I > > hope nobody objects), > > eivind> I object. > > Ouch:) Yes I know that some users doesn't update /etc if installworld > as you mentioned. However, according to src/UPDATING, mergemaster(8) > is listed in source-code upgrade procedure -- and many users knows > what mergemaster(8) is. Many guys mentioned to use mergemaster(8) on > current@/stable@ list. No matter what you dislike or not, it seems > that it's mandatory one.... Updating /etc has (IMO unfortunately) become a mandatory step for updates. However, I think that in lieu of how the world actually works in practice (users refuse to use it because it is so bad), we should NOT consider the mergemaster tool itself mandatory. I believe the only reason mergemaster is tolerable for most developers is that they upgrade much, much more frequently than most users. When I talk to actual users, I find that they "know they should", but try to avoid it. > eivind> The majority do (in order of frequence, high to low) manual > eivind> updates or don't update /etc unless they have to or use > eivind> etcmerge or write their own scripts. > > you also think that it would be better updating /etc files by some > other tools (well, I'll try using etcmerge later, thank you), not by > "make installworld", right? Yes. Eivind.