>> > > > On a more serious note, conf-update automatically merges trivial >> > > > changes, so any configs you ran at the default, which is probably the >> > > > majority, won't be flaged at all. >> > > >> > > so does cfg-update.... >> > >> > Every now and then, someone mentions cfg-update - usually you :) - and I >> > give it another try, but I don't really get on with it and always go back >> > to conf-update. There's nothing specific wrong with it, I just prefer (or >> > am used to) conf-update. >> > >> > I expect that if I were still using etc-update or dispatch-conf I would >> > welcome it with open arms though.
Yay, thanks for the ideas. dispatch-conf was a welcome change from etc-update, so this must be the next step. And just in time too, I updated to ~x86 last week, and I left around the 11 config files that need more than just hand waving to deal with (looks like important changes, but I did modifications as well to those cases). >> >> You make me feel out of touch with Gentoo! Is dispatch-conf and etc-update >> that bad then? > > out of touch would be rolling your own config update tool, like me ;) > It hasn't changed much since I started using Gentoo... > > -- > Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au> Sharing is caring! Can we try it? More importantly, would we want to? I'm wondering if some of these config manglers have configs themselves, or some place to keep track of the configs I want like red flagged to not get accidentially overwritten (sorry I didn't read the man pages yet because I didn't get too screwed without), because I want to keep track of the ones I edit other than some text file or my memory "oh yeah, vim I hated the auto-line wrapping...where's that backup from last week?" ~daid
