[gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-19 Thread Ian Zimmerman
On 2018-06-19 19:40, Kai Peter wrote: > In general the usage of sdiff is terrible to me. So I did my own > solution. Unfortunately it is not ready to publish it, but if it is > perhaps of interest to you have a look at > http://gentoo.dyndn.es/doku.php/utils:qrtconf. This page describes > mainly

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-19 Thread Kai Peter
On 2018-06-19 17:15, Ian Zimmerman wrote: On 2018-06-18 11:34, Rich Freeman wrote: Oh, the other tool you'll want to use is etckeeper to manage /etc in a git repo and auto-commit changes/etc with package manager hooks. That is a cross-distro tool, and will save your butt if you mess something

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-19 Thread Rich Freeman
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:15 AM Ian Zimmerman wrote: > > On 2018-06-18 11:34, Rich Freeman wrote: > > > Oh, the other tool you'll want to use is etckeeper to manage /etc in a > > git repo and auto-commit changes/etc with package manager hooks. That > > is a cross-distro tool, and will save your

[gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-19 Thread Ian Zimmerman
On 2018-06-18 11:34, Rich Freeman wrote: > Oh, the other tool you'll want to use is etckeeper to manage /etc in a > git repo and auto-commit changes/etc with package manager hooks. That > is a cross-distro tool, and will save your butt if you mess something > up. I already do this, only without

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-18 Thread Rich Freeman
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 3:27 AM Neil Bothwick wrote: > > There are other config managers that handle this differently, if you > don't like etc-update try another. I tried a few some years ago and > settled on conf-update, others swear by cfg-update. Since nobody else is shilling it, I will. I

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-18 Thread Daniel Frey
On 06/17/18 15:38, Peter Humphrey wrote: > I don't have any of those problems. I still use etc-update, and if there are > complex updates I edit the original file myself, using the diff as a guide. > > I never did get to grips with the more "modern" ways of doing it. > Same here, I tried

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-18 Thread Mick
On Monday, 18 June 2018 03:35:05 BST Ian Zimmerman wrote: > On 2018-06-17 18:12, Mick wrote: > > From the fine manual: > > z Zap (delete) the new config file and continue. > > So what do you do if the merge of this file is too hard and you want to > do it another time? The answer seems to

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-18 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 19:35:05 -0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > The problem (or multiple problems) here is that it doesn't say what is > being merged into what (no, its not symmetric), and to compound that it > doesn't just leave this file alone and quit or go on to the next file; > it shows some diff

[gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-17 Thread Ian Zimmerman
On 2018-06-17 18:12, Mick wrote: > From the fine manual: > > z Zap (delete) the new config file and continue. So what do you do if the merge of this file is too hard and you want to do it another time? The answer seems to be q (quit) or n (next), but _nothing_ in the documentation says

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-17 Thread Peter Humphrey
On Sunday, 17 June 2018 18:12:11 BST Mick wrote: > On Sunday, 17 June 2018 18:08:48 BST Ian Zimmerman wrote: > > On 2018-06-17 12:42, Andrew Udvare wrote: > > > On 06/17/2018 12:17 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > > > > What happens to files within the scope of CONFIG_PROTECT if I don't > > > > execute

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-17 Thread Mick
On Sunday, 17 June 2018 18:08:48 BST Ian Zimmerman wrote: > On 2018-06-17 12:42, Andrew Udvare wrote: > > On 06/17/2018 12:17 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > > > What happens to files within the scope of CONFIG_PROTECT if I don't > > > execute dispatch-conf or any similar thingy? I have found the > >

[gentoo-user] Re: default CONFIG_PROTECT behavior

2018-06-17 Thread Ian Zimmerman
On 2018-06-17 12:42, Andrew Udvare wrote: > On 06/17/2018 12:17 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > > What happens to files within the scope of CONFIG_PROTECT if I don't > > execute dispatch-conf or any similar thingy? I have found the > > confusion the latter tool generates completely unsurmountable. >