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 fresh install. 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
pgprkynpg2Np0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
