Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Tuesday, June 15, 2010 6:31:45 am Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com writes: 1. Script doesn't check to see whether or not it has write access (and doesn't catch some errors): IMHO, any shell script which is intended to be used more than twice should start with set -e. It turns out that this can be quite a PITA to workaround if you have commands that don't fail, but return status. I use a shell function which uses $? to return an enum of the result of comparing two files. Using -e for that requires many odd workarounds. A better case is diff(1). I use diff(1) to generate diff output for 'etcupdate diff' so you can generate a patch of your local changes to etc. However, diff returns $? of 1 if it detects a difference which is not a failure, but sh -e treats as a failure. This would require gross hacks along the line of || true or some such which obfuscate the code. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Thursday, June 10, 2010 1:46:59 pm John Baldwin wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. I finally committed a port to ports/sysutils/etcupdate for this today. If at some point lots of folks call for an import we can revisit this then. One small advantage of importing is that we could have make release automatically bootstrap it similar to how we do now for mtree databases (I do this in my FooBSD at work, it is a one-line patch to the release Makefile). -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Friday, July 09, 2010 4:21:51 pm John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday, June 10, 2010 1:46:59 pm John Baldwin wrote:
I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate
(http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an
alternate
tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong
objections
to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the
manpage can be found at the URL above.
I finally committed a port to ports/sysutils/etcupdate for this today. If at
some point lots of folks call for an import we can revisit this then. One
small advantage of importing is that we could have make release automatically
bootstrap it similar to how we do now for mtree databases (I do this in my
FooBSD at work, it is a one-line patch to the release Makefile).
For those who are interested, here is the patch to src/release/Makefile.
This assumes that etcupdate is available in the chroot during 'make release'.
I do this in my FooBSD by having it be part of the base system.
Index: release/Makefile
===
--- release/Makefile(.../mirror/FreeBSD/stable/7) (revision 210305)
+++ release/Makefile(.../stable/7) (revision 210305)
@@ -648,6 +651,8 @@
cd ${.CURDIR}/.. ${CROSSMAKE} distrib-dirs DESTDIR=${RD}/trees/base
cd ${.CURDIR}/.. ${CROSSMAKE} ${WORLD_FLAGS} distributeworld \
DISTDIR=${RD}/trees
+ etcupdate extract -B -d ${RD}/trees/base/var/db/etcupdate \
+ -M ${CROSSENV}
sh ${.CURDIR}/scripts/mm-mtree.sh -F ${CROSSENV} -D ${RD}/trees/base
touch ${.TARGET}
--
John Baldwin
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com writes: 1. Script doesn't check to see whether or not it has write access (and doesn't catch some errors): IMHO, any shell script which is intended to be used more than twice should start with set -e. DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Monday 14 June 2010 5:22:32 pm Garrett Cooper wrote: On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:46 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. Finally got around to looking at this. Some comments: 1. Script doesn't check to see whether or not it has write access (and doesn't catch some errors): $ etcupdate mkdir: /var/db/etcupdate: Permission denied /usr/sbin/etcupdate: cannot create /var/db/etcupdate/log: No such file or directory Eventually it stops though, so maybe it's not really a big issue... It does actually check, but it does so after it opens the log file. :-/ 2. Some messages are a bit misleading: $ etcupdate /usr/sbin/etcupdate: cannot create /var/db/etcupdate/log: Permission denied $ ls -l /var/db/etcupdate/log -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 0 Jun 14 14:06 /var/db/etcupdate/log $ whoami garrcoop That is the shell complaining due to this: exec 3$LOGFILE Arguably the shell is emitting the correct message since it is attempting to recreate the file. 3. Workflow comments. i. Ok... I know I'm doing a downgrade, but what now? $ sudo etcupdate No previous tree to compare against, a sane comparison is not possible. ii. Did a bit more reading, and I think that `etcupdate build' is what I want... but it wasn't happy when I did that: Did you read this part of the manpage: EXAMPLES If the source tree matches the currently installed world, then the fol- lowing can be used to bootstrap etcupdate so that it can be used for future upgrades: etcupdate extract To merge changes after an upgrade via the buildworld and installworld process: etcupdate To resolve any conflicts generated during a merge: etcupdate resolve Also, the README file at http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate/ may be useful. $ sudo etcupdate build Missing required tarball. usage: etcupdate [-nBF] [-d workdir] [-r | -s source | -t tarball] [-A patterns] [-D destdir] [-I patterns] [-L logfile] [-M options] etcupdate build [-B] [-d workdir] [-s source] [-L logfile] [-M options] tarball etcupdate diff [-d workdir] [-D destdir] [-I patterns] [-L logfile] etcupdate extract [-B] [-d workdir] [-s source | -t tarball] [-L logfile] [-M options] etcupdate resolve [-d workdir] [-D destdir] [-L logfile] etcupdate status [-d workdir] So uh... ok? Manpage and usage were a bit confusing (but not too bad). After I fixed my arguments, here's what I came up with: $ sudo etcupdate build -s /data/scratch/src/stable/8/ /root/etcupdate-stable8.tbz $ sudo etcupdate extract -t /root/etcupdate-stable8.tbz $ You could just do 'etcupdate extract -s /data/scratch/src/stable/8' in this case. :) However, when you do an extract, you are doing a one-time bootstrap. This step needs to be pointed at a source tree that matches what you already have installed. You can do an 'etcupdate diff' after the extract to see what local differences you have and make sure those look sane. Once you have done this, then you can use etcupdate for future upgrades by just running 'etcupdate'. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:46 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. Finally got around to looking at this. Some comments: 1. Script doesn't check to see whether or not it has write access (and doesn't catch some errors): $ etcupdate mkdir: /var/db/etcupdate: Permission denied /usr/sbin/etcupdate: cannot create /var/db/etcupdate/log: No such file or directory Eventually it stops though, so maybe it's not really a big issue... 2. Some messages are a bit misleading: $ etcupdate /usr/sbin/etcupdate: cannot create /var/db/etcupdate/log: Permission denied $ ls -l /var/db/etcupdate/log -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 0 Jun 14 14:06 /var/db/etcupdate/log $ whoami garrcoop 3. Workflow comments. i. Ok... I know I'm doing a downgrade, but what now? $ sudo etcupdate No previous tree to compare against, a sane comparison is not possible. ii. Did a bit more reading, and I think that `etcupdate build' is what I want... but it wasn't happy when I did that: $ sudo etcupdate build Missing required tarball. usage: etcupdate [-nBF] [-d workdir] [-r | -s source | -t tarball] [-A patterns] [-D destdir] [-I patterns] [-L logfile] [-M options] etcupdate build [-B] [-d workdir] [-s source] [-L logfile] [-M options] tarball etcupdate diff [-d workdir] [-D destdir] [-I patterns] [-L logfile] etcupdate extract [-B] [-d workdir] [-s source | -t tarball] [-L logfile] [-M options] etcupdate resolve [-d workdir] [-D destdir] [-L logfile] etcupdate status [-d workdir] So uh... ok? Manpage and usage were a bit confusing (but not too bad). After I fixed my arguments, here's what I came up with: $ sudo etcupdate build -s /data/scratch/src/stable/8/ /root/etcupdate-stable8.tbz $ sudo etcupdate extract -t /root/etcupdate-stable8.tbz $ Wait -- what happened...? What's going on isn't overly apparent from running extract. It's nice having clean utilities, but I'm not used to the etcupdate workflow, so having some verbosity would be helpful :D. Thanks, -Garrett ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 06/10/2010 20:45, Lawrence Stewart wrote: +1 for adding to base (and updating handbook chapters makeworld.html and small-lan.html, plus maybe /usr/src/Makefile and an UPDATING entry). As soon as this was said the idea popped into mind to just tie etcupdate into the source directly. Add it to the source tree somewhere where it can be called by (make etcupdate). In this case its on everybody's system and both can co-exist without harm. ;) Regardless of either decision to be made I look at adding a port just for this as unneeded overhead when people that are updating their system via source already have the tree on the system or near by. If you want it installed after all that either copy it to your ~/bin directory or symlink it. Regards, -- jhell ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Joel Dahl j...@freebsd.org wrote: On 10-06-2010 13:46, John Baldwin wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. +1 for importing it into base. +1 for importing into base. I would use it. Sam Fourman Jr. http://www.fourmannetworks.com ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 12.06.2010 14:57, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Joel Dahl j...@freebsd.org wrote: On 10-06-2010 13:46, John Baldwin wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. +1 for importing it into base. +1 for importing into base. I would use it. And another +1 from me. It solves a problem that needs solving. (and yes, I would use it) //Svein -- +---+--- /\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 12:46 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org +1 from me, I will use it. -Brandon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Thursday 10 June 2010 4:31:08 pm Mike Jakubik wrote: On 6/10/2010 2:47 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 10/06/2010 21:29 Eitan Adler said the following: -1 unless mergemaster is replaced. Have you tried etcupdate? etcupdate and mergemaster have a similar function but do things in quite a different way. While one is intended to be more interactive, the other is more automated. They can not replace each other. -1 Also. How does this differ from a mergemaster -iFU ? That's pretty much as automated as it can get. If you have a locally modified file, (e.g. enabled pam_ssh in /etc/pam.d/system), then mergemaster will require you to manually merge the changes interactively. etcupdate will attempt to do an updated three-way merge similar to doing a 'cvs update' or 'svn update' and will only generate a conflict requiring manual resolution if the merge generates a conflict. Also, mergemaster -iFU will always prompt the user for input if it encounters a conflict which is not always optimal (imagine scripting an OS upgrade for 100's of machines). etcupdate does not do any prompting until you run 'etcupdate resolve' to resolve conflicts. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 10-06-2010 13:46, John Baldwin wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. +1 for importing it into base. -- Joel ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 6/10/10 10:46 AM, John Baldwin wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. well mergemaster is in base so the options are: replace mergemaster, have both, move one to ports, or move both to ports. It does bring up the question (yet again) if we shouldn't have something that is between base and ports.. the keep base from bloating too much bit to still indicate that they are supported. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. -1 unless mergemaster is replaced. I'm ***not*** saying that mergemaster should be replaced. The base system would get too bloated if too many tools are added. -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
on 10/06/2010 21:29 Eitan Adler said the following: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. -1 unless mergemaster is replaced. Have you tried etcupdate? etcupdate and mergemaster have a similar function but do things in quite a different way. While one is intended to be more interactive, the other is more automated. They can not replace each other. I'm ***not*** saying that mergemaster should be replaced. The base system would get too bloated if too many tools are added. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 06/10/10 13:31, Mike Jakubik wrote: How does this differ from a mergemaster -iFU ? That's pretty much as automated as it can get. FYI, the -F option is usually only needed once, when switching from cvs checkout to svn checkout, or vice versa. It won't hurt anything to combine it with -U, but it may make your update slower. hth, Doug -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover!http://SupersetSolutions.com/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 06/10/2010 13:46, John Baldwin wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. Though I love the idea, I think the proper approach please dont get me wrong would be to move it into /usr/src/tools/ somewhere and create a makefile that when run just creates a symlink to it in a predetermined directory allowing folks to not really have it installed yet still update it for critical fixes while they are found without a re-install of it. MIB: +1 year Regards, -- jhell ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
Den 10/06/2010 kl. 22.31 skrev Mike Jakubik: On 6/10/2010 2:47 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 10/06/2010 21:29 Eitan Adler said the following: -1 unless mergemaster is replaced. Have you tried etcupdate? etcupdate and mergemaster have a similar function but do things in quite a different way. While one is intended to be more interactive, the other is more automated. They can not replace each other. -1 Also. How does this differ from a mergemaster -iFU ? That's pretty much as automated as it can get. I find the ability to do 'etcupdate diff' to quickly get an overview of which changes I have made to a standard installation very useful. Looking from the outside, I think the two tools could be merged to a single upgrade tool. I see three uses for such a tool: * Show me which local modifications I have, so I can see if they're still relevant for the upgraded system * Just do all the hard work for me (i.e. mergemaster -iFU) on files I didn't change * Guide me through merging updates to files I did modify myself (and please, don't ask me innocently if I want to delete my local account when it's 4 AM :-) I may be answering 'yes' in my sleep) +1 from me on etcupdate in base. Erik
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 06/10/10 10:46, John Baldwin wrote: | I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate | (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate | tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections | to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the | manpage can be found at the URL above. Initially mergemaster was a port which gave lots of people the opportunity to gain familiarity with it easily. At some point after it had been a port for a while there was a critical mass of people suggesting that it be moved into the base system since it was one of those ports that almost everyone installed anyway. That said, I have no objection to whatever the community decides should be done with etcupdate. Given that they approach the problems of updating differently I think that there will be people who are more attracted to it instead of mergemaster, and that's fine too. :) hth, Doug - -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover!http://SupersetSolutions.com/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJMEUmdAAoJEFzGhvEaGryEf4UH/jj+mXScik9Oo1kQWEBRn4b6 qLpVFKScsEX5OXKXAzgu48tDA9P9rkZOsL9thlyhPR2G4CsPyIl7EpYk0o91uvV7 +GUwBhI/MXh4GFwq0p42U92wbO9lRslg9vXkV0m+KoSXnswlIuqYLkfmwhuXu1QV Mc7cE4L3Ud6xnvvcmt3NTvyKatEYqvoIgF5FjXXgMUOjpWxWnLkgV/iq7/KFA4uf o+a2yWwRVrXVv73QX5UBcjFUBbO9jDhgK/RCa5z6g7csggkK9rdzsYJedrfYMkoz 3LOGqOkC64HeJBAHhUKUl+1V/CNvK6vkbDbLRvu/FV7mHPrRB6COzw0LuRFcEWA= =msL6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Thursday 10 June 2010 4:22:54 pm Doug Barton wrote: On 06/10/10 10:46, John Baldwin wrote: | I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate | (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate | tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections | to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the | manpage can be found at the URL above. Initially mergemaster was a port which gave lots of people the opportunity to gain familiarity with it easily. At some point after it had been a port for a while there was a critical mass of people suggesting that it be moved into the base system since it was one of those ports that almost everyone installed anyway. That said, I have no objection to whatever the community decides should be done with etcupdate. Given that they approach the problems of updating differently I think that there will be people who are more attracted to it instead of mergemaster, and that's fine too. :) My inclination is to simply add a port, but I had a rash of folks contact me today, so I was testing the waters to see what level of critical mass was present. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 6/10/2010 2:47 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 10/06/2010 21:29 Eitan Adler said the following: -1 unless mergemaster is replaced. Have you tried etcupdate? etcupdate and mergemaster have a similar function but do things in quite a different way. While one is intended to be more interactive, the other is more automated. They can not replace each other. -1 Also. How does this differ from a mergemaster -iFU ? That's pretty much as automated as it can get. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 06/10/10 11:18, Julian Elischer wrote: | It does bring up the question (yet again) if we shouldn't | have something that is between base and ports.. | the keep base from bloating too much bit to still indicate | that they are supported. Julian, This statement perpetuates the idea that somehow anything in ports is lesser than things that are in src, which frankly I'm way past being sick of. The ports tree is part of FreeBSD, period. If you don't believe me, try installing just the base without installing any ports, and then see how much work you're able to get done. Doug - -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover!http://SupersetSolutions.com/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJMEUpSAAoJEFzGhvEaGryE7DMIALLAQ3oituvWpboIVi3kqkU/ G4jH4tmasyOaWXqP5qH/xtcJDFfbNEKORlDrJem8q0XKluXaw8jZKW+8dgsdBAqJ IcGVfIOWDXID4ZdMAU1wvLiqB3Ozkt0RnOnrgR+lAbstTZlX886HUpPFU0AyNJj3 EQKOIwk2SVAa5Y6lF+NPf/+M56RSnzezgU2QVGYdbnjOLqsl91SEYgBAYQN50sqi meIWJeL3iGuZ0krkkwQ3/zFlKsq5o/x76pClv+yqevVdo/EIRvaG0AfcGEPwXMdO RdN1sMkl8E+2IVpr2ruIwjN8JtAqzkC/6EhOZcvsXheeoKQLgwR4D0O58uvEUPs= =XzyJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 6/10/2010 4:47 PM, Erik Cederstrand wrote: -1 Also. How does this differ from a mergemaster -iFU ? That's pretty much as automated as it can get. I find the ability to do 'etcupdate diff' to quickly get an overview of which changes I have made to a standard installation very useful. Looking from the outside, I think the two tools could be merged to a single upgrade tool. I see three uses for such a tool: * Show me which local modifications I have, so I can see if they're still relevant for the upgraded system * Just do all the hard work for me (i.e. mergemaster -iFU) on files I didn't change * Guide me through merging updates to files I did modify myself (and please, don't ask me innocently if I want to delete my local account when it's 4 AM :-) I may be answering 'yes' in my sleep) That actually sounds like a great idea to me. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 6/10/10 1:25 PM, Doug Barton wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 06/10/10 11:18, Julian Elischer wrote: | It does bring up the question (yet again) if we shouldn't | have something that is between base and ports.. | the keep base from bloating too much bit to still indicate | that they are supported. Julian, This statement perpetuates the idea that somehow anything in ports is lesser than things that are in src, which frankly I'm way past being sick of. The ports tree is part of FreeBSD, period. If you don't believe me, try installing just the base without installing any ports, and then see how much work you're able to get done. unfortunately it is true. code in the base tree gets fixed by people making sweeping changes but things from ports often do not. Ports are not installed by default so you can't assume they are there. Like it or not Ports are, no matter how little, second class citizens. I do not belittle the importance of having them, just stating the facts as I see them. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 06/11/10 03:46, John Baldwin wrote: I've had several folks ask me recently about importing etcupdate (http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/etcupdate) into the base system as an alternate tool for updating /etc during upgrades. Do folks have any strong objections to doing so? More details about how it works and an HTML version of the manpage can be found at the URL above. +1 for adding to base (and updating handbook chapters makeworld.html and small-lan.html, plus maybe /usr/src/Makefile and an UPDATING entry). Cheers, Lawrence ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 05:28:01PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: code in the base tree gets fixed by people making sweeping changes but things from ports often do not. By 'sweeping changes', I take it you mean to src? And if by 'things from ports', I take you mean that ports break on -current all the time, due to changes in src? mcl ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: RFC: etcupdate tool in base?
On 6/10/2010 5:28 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: code in the base tree gets fixed by people making sweeping changes but things from ports often do not. Code will either be maintained well, or it will not. I've seen plenty of stuff in src break, and the src build is often broken by under-tested changes (even in -stable branches). As I said in my original post, your attitude is anachronistic, and needs to change. It's not ok for people to make random sweeping src changes, even in -current, that break things in ports. Doug -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover!http://SupersetSolutions.com/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
