Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:32:17 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Gavin Atkinson <gavin@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r186677 - head/usr.sbin/mergemaster Message-ID: <495DC301.2090700@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20090101215930.P70386@ury.york.ac.uk> References: <200901011055.n01AtQaN052763@svn.freebsd.org> <20090101215930.P70386@ury.york.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gavin Atkinson wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> Given that this is a situation that comes up very infrequently (usually
>> only for a major version upgrade)
>
> This is no longer true: a side effect of having SVN exported to CVS is
> that every time a branch is forked, the CVS ID is bumped, and as a
> result is different between 7.0 and 7.1 even if the file itself isn't
> changed.
Thanks for that explanation.
> As long as this is handled with -U, however, I'm not sure I see the need
> for special handling. I'd love to see the -U otion as default, and a
> pre-populated mtree database for it shipped with the releases, however.
> This would go a long way towards making upgrading more user-friendly.
I would not be supportive of -U as the default for reasons I've stated
previously on numerous occasions.
The idea of pre-installing an mtree database is interesting, but the
problem is that it gets awkward when you compare virgin installs to
upgrades (which don't touch /etc/ directly). If someone wants to work
up patches to the release process I'd be happy to review them, but I
have no idea what re@ would say to it.
hth,
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?495DC301.2090700>