On 11/15, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > +@conflict rancid-<3v0 > > Except for special situations (e.g. what we have in autoconf), an @conflict > on the same port doesn't make sense. > > > +@ask-update rancid-<3v0 Make sure router.db files use new fields separator > > before upgrading > > I think either MESSAGE *or* @ask-update is enough. ask-update is quite > annoying so I'd rather restrict it for use in special cases (like postgresql, > where <until Jeremy's work goes in> there is significant extra hassle if you > don't dump before the package gets updated) and stick to just MESSAGE.
Frankly, I'm not sure now: I switched to rancid v3 about 2 years ago. I payed attention to upgrade issues when upgraded from v2 and at that time I concluded that @ask-update is fair: the problem with rancid is that it is called from cron(8); if it's blindly upgraded and the configuration is not corrected, the CVS tree it uses for storing device configs will be broken. Do you think having @ask-update along with the MESSAGE is too much hassle? -- With best regards, Pavel Korovin
