Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 11:50:53 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: mergemaster broken? Message-ID: <4428421D.4060101@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060327185752.GG7001@funkthat.com> References: <20060320221741.GA13699@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20060320230009.GA55254@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20060320231604.GH83781@ip.net.ua> <20060320232746.GI83781@ip.net.ua> <20060320234006.GV35129@funkthat.com> <20060320234145.GB33003@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20060321064528.GD77849@ip.net.ua> <44206E9F.6020702@FreeBSD.org> <20060327093402.H43553@fledge.watson.org> <20060327185752.GG7001@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> Robert Watson wrote this message on Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 09:38 +0000:
>> So while I don't have opinions about the implementation details, I think
>> what Ruslan is proposing is architecturally the right thing. How to handle
>> the command line argument, I don't have an opinion, except that user
>> surprise is bad, so a new argument with some compatibility and a warning is
>> probably better than changing "-m".
>
> Why not detect etc as the last component of -m and print a nice little
> warning, and then remove /etc from the path? (or adding .. if we end
> up with an empty path).. and after a year or so, remove the warning
> and the compat code...
That's basically the direction I'm looking at right now.
> I doubt people are doing something really crazy
> like making foobarbaz a symlink to etc, and depending upon that.. If
> they are, they get what the deserve...
My concern is more people who have scripted solutions that include the -m
argument, but I'm sure that we can make this work.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4428421D.4060101>