[pacman-dev] config handling
roman.kyrylych at gmail.com
Fri May 26 05:12:02 EDT 2006
>> * lib/libalpm/add.c: changed behaviour with
>> original=X,current=Y,new=Z backup scenario -- install new file as
>> .pacnew and keep old one in place
>> it seems that later it was backported to pacman2
>> just wanted to mention you that before this change the NoUpgrade option
>> was really important
> Ha yes indeed, this change was made in the latest 2.9.8 release, and it's indeed
> very important. But that's really the way it should have been since the start
> (since there are no automerging kind of stuff, which doesn't really matter btw :)).
> Now if these pacnew files are only extracted when the default config files were
> actually updated, it'll be easier to track down these changes and update manually
> the corresponding config files.
> I'm glad that you agree that NoUpgrade is less important now, and I can also see
> why it was needed before.
> So either NoUpgrade should be removed, or moving config files outside NoUpgrade
> should be fixed by storing the correct md5sum. My patch does it, since it makes
> pacman handle config files in NoUpgrade like the others, but it also checks
> md5sum to see whether the pacnew file needs to be extracted or not. So the only
> difference left is in the case :
> where the config file should be safely updated, but NoUpgrade still prevents it
> (but doesn't make much sense to me).
Hi! I'm new to this list, so please sorry if I do some stupid things. :)
Just want to say: NoUpgrade should not be removed! It is very
important if, for example I have modified rc.sysinit and don't want it
to be silently overwritten during upgrade. For config files (files
that are in backup=() array) NoUpgrade is not needed, but it is useful
for other files that were modified by user.
More information about the pacman-dev