From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 22 17:16:14 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7A0616A4B3 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:16:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net (rwcrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.198.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D48824400D for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:15:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mupi@mknet.org) Received: from c-67-166-109-159.client.comcast.net ([67.166.109.159]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id <2003092300154701300f3cu6e>; Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:15:47 +0000 From: Mike Porter To: stable@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:14:21 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 References: <12829.1064235540@thrush.ravenbrook.com> <3F6F0A0C.1060308@rsm.ru> <447k404pr5.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> In-Reply-To: <447k404pr5.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: clearsigned data Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200309221814.26301.mupi@mknet.org> cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: About mergemaster (Re: upgrading) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:16:14 -0000 =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 22 September 2003 12:55 pm, Lowell Gilbert wrote: > far as I can see from the PR database. The mergemaster author didn't > especially like the idea, because he thinks people ought to know how > their computers are configured. > > I'll be happy to take a look at your patches when you get it working. The only problem with this theory is a significant number of the files flag= ged=20 by mergemaster, the only difference is the cvs version tag (in theory, this= =20 shouldn't be happening, since the cvs tag shouldn't update unless something= =20 in the file changes, but I have seen this nonetheless. Somewhat along the= =20 same lines are files where the only changes are changes to typos in comment= s,=20 or adding/deleting comments, which have no functional difference on the fil= e=20 itself.).=20 I tend to agree in many of the rest of the cases, but what about files tha= t=20 rarely, if ever, change from update to update? (rc.network, for example,=20 which hasn't changed since July, or how about rc.isdn and rc.i386, which sh= ow=20 version lines from early 2001, for more extreme examples) Granted these=20 files won't trigger mergemaster, unless changed (in which case you could=20 generally simply keep your existing file; unless something else changes and= =20 you need merge the files. I would strongly support a mechanism for asking for user input: "file=20 rc.network is unchaged from default, but the new version is different. =20 (v)iew/(c)ontinue? [v]" This would give the user the choice to be ignorant= ,=20 and sometimes, I would choose that, jsut becuase I want to get done=20 (especially if I am merging on the second or third machine, let alone 50 or= =20 100)...also a scripting mechanism to automate installation on multiple=20 machines. well, i've rambled on long enough... mike =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/b5BhY30jZzkECLcRAtsQAJ9wo1a3NDPOok827bssFgvH5x0evACgpnIt N8SiR0CaWBisYAakT1ywuEk=3D =3D25GI =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----