On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 00:14:13 +0200 Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> Hi Bakul,
>
> Sorry for the late reply, I'm lagging behind in my FreeBSD mailbox :).
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:57:48AM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote:
> >
> > But I wonder... why not build something like this around cvs?
> > Basically a
Hi Bakul,
Sorry for the late reply, I'm lagging behind in my FreeBSD mailbox :).
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:57:48AM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote:
>
> But I wonder... why not build something like this around cvs?
> Basically a three way merge is exactly what we want for /etc,
> right? cvs because it
Ivan Voras writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> > Bourne shell is a perfectly fine programming language if you know
> > how to use it.
> I'll agree that it's fine but only in the abstract - e.g. that it is
> Turing complete :)
Emphasis on "if you know how to use it". It's like Perl - it's ea
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Robert Watson wrote:
... web browsers [are] basically operating systems at this point ...
Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration? Not too many browsers have to deal
with process/thread scheduling, or device drivers, or booting, or file
system
Robert Watson wrote:
> ... web browsers [are] basically operating systems at this point ...
Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration? Not too many browsers have
to deal with process/thread scheduling, or device drivers, or
booting, or file system issues -- they rely on the OS for that
(as does any ot
On 03/25/10 09:51, Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Ivan Voras wrote:
Wouldn't it be nice to have a "blessed" (i.e. present-in-base) script
language interpreter with a syntax that has evolved since the
1970-ies? (with a side-glance to C that *has* evolved since the K&R
style).
...
A
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Ivan Voras wrote:
Wouldn't it be nice to have a "blessed" (i.e. present-in-base) script
language interpreter with a syntax that has evolved since the 1970-ies?
(with a side-glance to C that *has* evolved since the K&R style).
...
As a possible alternative, or at least to
2010/3/24 Dag-Erling Smørgrav :
> Ivan Voras writes:
>> C is good enough. I'm after /bin/sh here.
>
> Bourne shell is a perfectly fine programming language if you know how to
> use it.
I'll agree that it's fine but only in the abstract - e.g. that it is
Turing complete :)
(But then again, I've h
On 24 March 2010 20:03, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2010-Mar-24 14:11:21 +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
> There's awk (though it's somewhat restricted in its abilities to do
> anything more than text manipulation) but in principle, I agree. The
> requirements as I see them are (in no particular order):
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> [snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
> mergemaster if it gets committed, like the idea about automated updates]
>
>> To that end, I wrote a new tool that I think does a dec
Ivan Voras writes:
> C is good enough. I'm after /bin/sh here.
Bourne shell is a perfectly fine programming language if you know how to
use it.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 10:49:12 am Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 03/24/10 15:02, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Wednesday 24 March 2010 9:11:21 am Ivan Voras wrote:
> >> On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
> >>
> >> [snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
> >> mergemaster if
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 12:57:48 pm Bakul Shah wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:08:45 EDT John Baldwin wrote:
> > or 'cvs up'. If the local changes I made do not conflict, then just merge
> > the
> > changes automatically (e.g. enabling a serial console in /etc/ttys should
> > not
> > confli
On 2010-Mar-24 14:11:21 +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
>Since the issue comes around very rarely, I assume there are not many
>people who also get the shivers when they see a shell script (and then a
>"posixy" /bin/sh shell script) more than a 100 lines long? :)
With the specific exception of GNU con
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:08:45 EDT John Baldwin wrote:
> or 'cvs up'. If the local changes I made do not conflict, then just merge the
> changes automatically (e.g. enabling a serial console in /etc/ttys should not
> conflict with $FreeBSD$ changing when moving from 7.2 to 7.3).
>
> To that end,
On 03/24/10 15:02, John Baldwin wrote:
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 9:11:21 am Ivan Voras wrote:
On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
[snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
mergemaster if it gets committed, like the idea about automated updates]
To that end, I wrot
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 9:11:21 am Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> [snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
> mergemaster if it gets committed, like the idea about automated updates]
>
> > To that end, I wrote a new tool that I think do
On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
[snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
mergemaster if it gets committed, like the idea about automated updates]
To that end, I wrote a new tool that I think does a decent job of solving
these goals.
Since the issue comes aro
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:08 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
> I have tried a few approaches (and looked at another) for updating /etc after
> world upgrades over the past several years. All of these approaches have
> various tradeoffs of pros and cons. However, none of them fully fit what I
> wanted:
>
I have tried a few approaches (and looked at another) for updating /etc after
world upgrades over the past several years. All of these approaches have
various tradeoffs of pros and cons. However, none of them fully fit what I
wanted:
1) Using a set of manual steps first outlined in the handbo
20 matches
Mail list logo
