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>