[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon
From:       Doug Goldstein <cardoe () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2013-08-17 2:33:38
Message-ID: CAFWqQMQWx-_7o3JiY8wh3zo+bh3rvEw0wbhKQzMVzgKk+NOTQA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Ian Stakenvicius <axs@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > For everyone's information -- The conf.d/net removal on upgrade is a
> > packaging issue, which could not have been tested prior to
> > openrc-0.12.ebuild hitting the tree.  There are details in
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=481336 if anyone's interested
> > in why it's happening.
> >
> > I've fixed the 0.12.ebuild in the tree now.  It's a hack but it seems
> > to be the best possible solution.
>
> Thanks for the update.  From the other report it seems unlikely that
> calling for volunteers would have turned up much.
>
> That's just the nature of ~arch - if you get an openrc update you're
> among the first.  Gentoo users should know what they're doing
> regardless, and ~arch users doubly-so.
>
> Also, it really isn't Gentoo-specific, but putting /etc in a git repo
> is a really good practice, and I'm wondering if it should go in the
> handbook as a result.
>
> Rich
>
>
sys-apps/etckeeper is what you want. Works great. It even has portage
integration. Though I'd recommend going with the ~arch version instead of
stable for that portion.

-- 
Doug Goldstein

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra">On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Rich \
Freeman <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:rich0@gentoo.org" \
target="_blank">rich0@gentoo.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"> \
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Ian \
Stakenvicius &lt;<a href="mailto:axs@gentoo.org">axs@gentoo.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>

&gt; For everyone&#39;s information -- The conf.d/net removal on upgrade is a<br>
&gt; packaging issue, which could not have been tested prior to<br>
&gt; openrc-0.12.ebuild hitting the tree.   There are details in<br>
&gt; <a href="https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=481336" \
target="_blank">https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=481336</a> if anyone&#39;s \
interested<br> &gt; in why it&#39;s happening.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I&#39;ve fixed the 0.12.ebuild in the tree now.   It&#39;s a hack but it \
seems<br> &gt; to be the best possible solution.<br>
<br>
</div>Thanks for the update.   From the other report it seems unlikely that<br>
calling for volunteers would have turned up much.<br>
<br>
That&#39;s just the nature of ~arch - if you get an openrc update you&#39;re<br>
among the first.   Gentoo users should know what they&#39;re doing<br>
regardless, and ~arch users doubly-so.<br>
<br>
Also, it really isn&#39;t Gentoo-specific, but putting /etc in a git repo<br>
is a really good practice, and I&#39;m wondering if it should go in the<br>
handbook as a result.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Rich<br>
<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br>sys-apps/etckeeper is what you want. Works \
great. It even has portage integration. Though I&#39;d recommend going with the ~arch \
version instead of stable for that portion.</div><div class="gmail_extra"> <br>-- \
<br>Doug Goldstein </div></div>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]