Hello,
Am Montag, 4. September 2006 13:33 schrieb Christoph Thiel:
[...]
> That's an optimization that should be implemented in any case. I
> don't think we will need to keep a "last-run" file, but rather
> compare the mtime of the sysconfig files with the resulting config
> files to figure out if we need to run SuSEconfig.
Comparing the mtime of sysconfig and the resulting file won't work
reliable.
Think about the following scenario: A user first edits a sysconfig file
(say "sysconfig/postfix"), then edits the resulting file (main.cf) by
hand and runs SuSEconfig afterwards.
When comparing timestamps of main.cf and sysconfig/postfix, SuSEconfig
will see that main.cf is newer and will not update it.
(I expect "touch sysconfig/postfix" advice in the mailinglists ;-) - but
this can't be the solution.)
While I usually don't like timestamp files and alike, they can prevent
some trouble here ;-)
Regards,
Christian Boltz
PS: The above files are only examples and apply to all other generated
config files too.
--
>He Mann, isse krasse, erste Wort: "Kyptographie", isse schon falsch.
>Was machst du?
Uuuhhh. Ist in der Listenkasse noch genug Geld für ein Wörterbuch?
[> Ratti und Thorsten Haude in sl-etikette]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
