[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Two improvements to etcupdate(8)
Le 2016-02-01 11:31, Edgar Fuß a écrit :
After some reflexion your case is different, etcupdate(8) is more
oriented towards an admin that updates the system rather than the dev
that updates etc/ because the OS evolved.
I don't get the difference between the two.
postinstall does not propose the admin to merge, compare, delete or
insert files when they are different from the original one, it runs
checks on specific files and apply the modifications if the checks pass
successfully as coded inside postinstall(8). For example, when updating
etc/, it can install additional powerd scripts if they are missing.
If anything unexpected happens (for example, files modifications are not
the ones expected by postinstall), it will log and leave it to the admin
to fix it manually. There is no interface proposed by postinstall to
help the admin merge or replace the new files like etcupdate does. It
only rely on the checks and fixes someone added to postinstall.
This is where I make the distinction between postinstall and etcupdate.
An admin will modify the system to suit his/her needs in ways
postinstall cannot anticipate (rc.conf, passwd, etc.). As such another
tool gets used to help update the system, etcupdate.
Its the way I see postinstall and etcupdate (opinions may differ).
Depending on which role you "play", you will adapt either postinstall or
etcupdate. In your specific case, I considered that your modifications
are indeed more geared towards etcupdate operation than postinstall,
therefore changing my initial mindset.
But in fact, my case is different: I have a (self-written) management
system that takes care of most of the configuration files.
Now on the one hand, after an OS update, for technical reasons, for
those (syslog.conf, newsyslog.conf, ...), it needs the pristine OS
installed before runnig while for most, it doesn't.
On the other hand, it doesn't manage some ``dangerous'' files
group, rc), I take care of those manually and want to make sure I don't
accidently overwrite them on an interactive etcupdate run.
However, what you propose is from my PoV dangerous, you could
Yes, of course. However, my autoanswer file consists of a few ``m''
for the ``dangerous'' files (so I don't overwrite them by accident),
few ``i'' entries (for the special case mentioned above) and mostly
wreck the conf if you happen to play the wrong "autoanswer" file.
entries for the bulk of files taken care of by the management system.
Main Index |
Thread Index |