Renaud MICHEL wrote: > On Wednesday 13 octobre 2010 at 23:34, Frank Griffin wrote : > >> One way of doing it might be, having identified packages that require >> this sort of support, to wrap the executables with scripts that do this >> the next time a user runs the software before the real executable is >> launched. >> > Now that's getting very hackish. > I'd rather not have many programs wrapped in scripts that would do some > magic on my home dir under the hood. Because with such a "solution" the > programs would be always wrapped, even if you never do a rollback. > How would such script detect that it actually was a rollback and it should > do his magic on the config files. >
The wrapper script would be specific to the package version which provided it. If it finds a saved config file with a name matching its own version, it restores it and deletes the saved one. If it doesn't, it does nothing. > What would happen if the user did not run that program between the update > and the rollback? > Nothing, because the new wrapper script would never have been executed to save a previous version, so the restored old wrapper script would not find anything to restore. > It seems the complexity is not worth the benefit, and those scripts are > likely to not be well tested and might make things worse if things are not > like they expected. > That's a pretty broad statement, especially considering the complexity of some of the wrapper scripts we already have. This is not that complex, and the benefit of finding a solution is considerable, based on the previous posts/relies in this thread.
