Am 13.12.2015 um 21:50 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski:
On Dec 13, 2015 12:38 PM, "Reindl Harald" <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > Am 13.12.2015 um 21:22 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski: >> >> For the few cases that can't or won't comply, then having rpm >> (optionally?) make the originals available would be fantastic for >> system management > > > how many copies would you like to store in the rpm database and how to access them in a useful manner Exactly one, for the current installed version.
not terrible helpful
> honestly: > that all violates the unix principles one tool for one task and there are tools available for config file management many years, people interested just need to use them, "etckeeper" is integrated in dnf/yum and makes a versioned "snapshot" of /etc before and after updates are applied Since when is there a UNIX principle that, just because a mediocre solution exists, a better solution shouldn't be added.
how can bloating the rpm-database in a very limited way be a better solution than having any changes below /etc versioned over years
In any case, most existing tools really struggle with "what has changed on my configuration relative to what I'd have if I reinstalled?"
how is rpm here a solution?how should it know which version is "if I reinstalled" after several dist-upgrades - keep the very first version of a config file makes no sense - how would a httpd.conf from 2008 help on a Fedora 23 with httpd-2.4 and the same for most other package over the time?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
