mergemaster improvement (auto-update for not modified files)
doconnor at gsoft.com.au
Fri May 6 08:07:26 PDT 2005
On Sat, 7 May 2005 00:15, Denis Peplin wrote:
> > Like I said before etcmerge's UI is not like mergemaster - it is much
> > more batch oriented.
> It is complicated for end-user to move from mergemaster to etcmerge
> (need to install new tool, read manual, perform some additional work...)
Maybe, I don't think it is that much effort.
The gain is much less work and many fewer questions each update so it's nice.
> > You don't need to download anything to start using etcmerge, you can just
> > use the files from your last mergemaster.
> For etcmerge it is need to run mergemaster "one last time", or use
> etc archive for some release. So if mergemaster will be improved,
> it will be better for etcmerge :)
Well, you can use etcmerge if you haven't changed anything in /etc - ie on a
Even if the checksum test is added to mergemaster it only covers one of the
cases etcmerge handles, it still doesn't do a 3 way merge. The merge etcmerge
does is very nice for removing changes to files you don't care about.
> > 264k is a pretty large file to commit to the repo..
> Yes, I know. And don't sure that it is some need to commit this file.
> Anyway, this file is less that INDEX, and unlike INDEX, will not
> rapidly changed. Checksum database will grow slowly.
The INDEX file isn't in CVS anymore..
It probably won't grow very fast, but IMO it seems like a bit of a kludge.
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
-- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/attachments/20050507/152416f8/attachment-0001.bin
More information about the freebsd-hackers