Subject: Re: etcupdate and atf-run.hooks
To: Alan Barrett <>
From: Johnny Billquist <>
List: current-users
Date: 12/20/2007 08:58:38
Alan Barrett skrev:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Sarton O'Brien wrote:
>> Having always etcupdated the default way, it took me a while to figure out 
>> what I should be doing. Still not sure if using -s <file> is now required? 
>> Why does the default way now break?
> If by "the default way" you mean "without giving an -s argument", then
> it's always been broken.  It might be broken worse than usual now; I am
> not sure.  Anyway, I have just proposed, over in tech-install, that it
> should be an error to run etcupdate or postinstall without giving a "-s"
> argument.  Please comment in that thread rather than here.

Huh? In what way was it broken before?
It worked perfectly fine before, and now it don't.
If you just objected to the fact that it created an /etc, based in the current 
contents of /usr/src, rather than whatever the most recent build used, that's 
something that the user asked for, so I don't think it's wrong to give it to 
him. Can we stop trying to be too smart here? If the user asks for something, 
give it to him, and don't be obnoxious.

However, etcupdate itself isn't any different now than before. If I remember 
right it's the fact that a make in /usr/src/etc is now broken that is the problem.

And I don't read tech-install, so I haven't seen your proposal.


Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email:             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol