[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposal to improve package configuration upgrades



On Wed, Feb 25 2009, Dominique Dumont wrote:

> Harald Braumann <harry@unheit.net> writes:
>
>> I don't really know Config::Model. But the main problem I have with the
>> current system is, that I only see diffs between the currently
>> installed version and the new package version. 
>
> With ucf, you see a diff between current file (i.e. installed version
> with your modifications) and the new package version. 
>
>> No what I really would like to see is the diff between the last version
>> I've merged and the new package version. 
>
> I fail to see the differences (no pun intented) between "the last
> version I've merged" and the current file ...

        Well. If the maintainer so desires, ucf does have this to say:
,----[  Manual page ucf(1) ]
| --three-way
|        This turns on the option, during installation, for the user to
|        be offered a chance to see a merge of the changes between old
|        maintainer version and the new maintainer version into the
|        local copy of the configuration file. If the user likes what
|        they see, they can ask to have these changes merged in. This
|        allows one to get new upstream changes merged in even while
|        retaining local modifications to the configuration file.  This
|        is accomplished by taking the configuration file and stashing
|        it in a cache area during registration, and using diff3 during
|        the install (the stashed file name is a munged version of the
|        full path of the configuration file to avoid name space
|        clashes).  Note This option appeared in Version 0.8 of ucf,
|        which was the first version released into unstable and
|        ultimately Sarge.  The version of ucf in woody does not contain
|        this option.
`----


        Seems like this is what is desired; however, the reason this is
 not on by default is that some configuration files can be huge, and ucf
 did not want to stash away _all_ the configuration files handled by it
 into /var.  The exectation was that most developers with smallish
 configuration files would use --three-way, but that expectation was
 unfounded.

        manoj
-- 
In the stairway of life, you'd best take the elevator.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


Reply to: