Debian Bug report logs - #413436
[CONFFILE] Cleverer conffile merge

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Display info messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: add possibility to use external merge program for configuration file changes

Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 00:45:10 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Package: dpkg
Version: 1.13.25
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Hi,
it would be cool if dpkg could use an external program to 
merge a new and an old configuration file on package update.
The current situation is a bit suboptimal since you loose 
your old changes when installing the new version of a 
configuration file (ok there is a backup) and if you keep 
your old installation you can miss new configuration 
parameters and stuff.

I created a patch to introduce a variable for dpkg 
(merge-tools e.g. merge-tools /usr/bin/vimdiff) to enable 
this feature.
You can find the patch on: http://nion.modprobe.de/dpkg_allowmerge.patch

This would also close 120152 and 32877 since you can just 
specify these programs.
Kind regards
Nico

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686
Locale: LANG=de_DE@euro, LC_CTYPE=de_DE@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)

Versions of packages dpkg depends on:
ii  coreutils                   5.97-5.3     The GNU core utilities
ii  libc6                       2.3.6.ds1-13 GNU C Library: Shared libraries

dpkg recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

-- 
Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de
JAB: nion@jabber.ccc.de - GPG: 0x73647CFF
Forget about that mouse with 3/4/5 buttons,
gimme a keyboard with 103/104/105 keys!

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #10 received at 413436@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>, 413436@bugs.debian.org

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#413436: add possibility to use external merge program for configuration file changes

Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 04:44:53 +0200

retitle 413436 [CONFFILE] Cleverer conffile merge
merge 32877 413436
thanks

Hi,

On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 00:45:10 +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> Package: dpkg
> Version: 1.13.25
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch

> it would be cool if dpkg could use an external program to 
> merge a new and an old configuration file on package update.
> The current situation is a bit suboptimal since you loose 
> your old changes when installing the new version of a 
> configuration file (ok there is a backup) and if you keep 
> your old installation you can miss new configuration 
> parameters and stuff.

> I created a patch to introduce a variable for dpkg 
> (merge-tools e.g. merge-tools /usr/bin/vimdiff) to enable 
> this feature.
> You can find the patch on: http://nion.modprobe.de/dpkg_allowmerge.patch

Please in the future attach patches in your bug reports. Also by
skimming over the patch I see this is wrong:

@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ enum conffopt {
   cfof_prompt        =     001,
   cfof_keep          =     002,
   cfof_install       =     004,
+  cfof_merge         =     006,
   cfof_backup        =   00100,
   cfof_newconff      =   00200,
   cfof_isnew         =   00400,

this should be a uniq octal value to be ORed, and this one is a
combination of 002 and 004.

> This would also close 120152 and 32877 since you can just
> specify these programs.

Why did you open a new bug report, knowing that there's already 8
other merged ones, with patches.

regards,
guillem

Message #19 received at 413436@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>

To: 413436@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#413436: add possibility to use external merge program for configuration file changes

Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 19:52:36 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,
first I didn't get a copy of your mail, I don't know why.

On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 19:48:27 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 00:45:10 +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> > Package: dpkg
> > Version: 1.13.25
> > Severity: wishlist
> > Tags: patch
> 
> > it would be cool if dpkg could use an external program to 
> > merge a new and an old configuration file on package update.
> > The current situation is a bit suboptimal since you loose 
> > your old changes when installing the new version of a 
> > configuration file (ok there is a backup) and if you keep 
> > your old installation you can miss new configuration 
> > parameters and stuff.
> 
> > I created a patch to introduce a variable for dpkg 
> > (merge-tools e.g. merge-tools /usr/bin/vimdiff) to enable 
> > this feature.
> > You can find the patch on: http://nion.modprobe.de/dpkg_allowmerge.patch
> 
> Please in the future attach patches in your bug reports. 

Seems to be a good idea if I look at bugs living > 8 years in the BTS ;)

> Also by
> skimming over the patch I see this is wrong:
> 
> @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ enum conffopt {
>    cfof_prompt        =     001,
>    cfof_keep          =     002,
>    cfof_install       =     004,
> +  cfof_merge         =     006,
>    cfof_backup        =   00100,
>    cfof_newconff      =   00200,
>    cfof_isnew         =   00400,
> 
> this should be a uniq octal value to be ORed, and this one is a
> combination of 002 and 004.

Thanks, changed. Patch attached.

> > This would also close 120152 and 32877 since you can just
> > specify these programs.
> 
> Why did you open a new bug report, knowing that there's already 8
> other merged ones, with patches.

Cause people tend to forget things sometimes.
Kind regards
Nico

-- 
Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de
JAB: nion@jabber.ccc.de - GPG: 0x73647CFF
Forget about that mouse with 3/4/5 buttons,
gimme a keyboard with 103/104/105 keys!

[dpkg_allowmerge.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

[Message part 3 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #26 received at 413436@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>

To: 413436@bugs.debian.org

Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:50:09 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,
you came to any decision wether you include this patch or 
not?
I really don't want to see this patch resting here for the 
next 8 years.
Kind regards
Nico

-- 
Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de
JAB: nion@jabber.ccc.de - GPG: 0x73647CFF
Forget about that mouse with 3/4/5 buttons,
gimme a keyboard with 103/104/105 keys!

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #31 received at 413436@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>, 413436@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#413436: (no subject)

Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:23:20 +0300

On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 12:50:09 +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> you came to any decision wether you include this patch or 
> not?

Yes, this have been on my TODO list for months, and it's going to be
fixed for lenny. But not with your patch, there are better ones on the
BTS already (as I already stated before).

regards,
guillem

Message #36 received at 413436@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>

To: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

Cc: 413436@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#413436: (no subject)

Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:30:36 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,
* Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> [2007-03-28 17:53]:
> On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 12:50:09 +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> > you came to any decision wether you include this patch or 
> > not?
> 
> Yes, this have been on my TODO list for months, and it's going to be
> fixed for lenny. But not with your patch, there are better ones on the
> BTS already (as I already stated before).

You didn't state that there is a patch which is better. Why 
are the other patches better? Improvements are always 
welcome.
Oh and thought about being a bit friendlier to people who'd 
like to help you? ;)
Kind regards
Nico
-- 
Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de
JAB: nion@jabber.ccc.de - GPG: 0x73647CFF
Forget about that mouse with 3/4/5 buttons,
gimme a keyboard with 103/104/105 keys!

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #41 received at 413436@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>, 413436@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#413436: (no subject)

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 03:03:16 +0300

On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 19:30:36 +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> * Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> [2007-03-28 17:53]:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 12:50:09 +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> > > you came to any decision wether you include this patch or 
> > > not?
> > 
> > Yes, this have been on my TODO list for months, and it's going to be
> > fixed for lenny. But not with your patch, there are better ones on the
> > BTS already (as I already stated before).

Nico,

> You didn't state that there is a patch which is better. Why 
> are the other patches better? Improvements are always 
> welcome.

There's not only one, in fact there's several in the BTS.

> Oh and thought about being a bit friendlier to people who'd 
> like to help you? ;)

Ok, I agree I was a bit harsh, sorry, but, you are not really helping
here, you filed a bug report for something that has been filed already
8 times in the BTS, those contain several patches and discussions on
possible implementation, which I pointed out previously, you seem to
not have had a look at them. By just skimming over the patch you sent I
found at least one grave error on it. And after 3 weeks you send a prod
about the status of this. We are in deep freeze, granted that development
keeps going in svn and there's a planned upload to experimental, and a
roadmap which I posted on the list. And then also you ask us to explain
what's wrong with your patch or a comparison with the others.

dpkg has around 500 bugs filed, the time to deal with this kind of
"help" is time that we cannot dedicate to actually fixing it. And I'm
aware we are all humans and do mistakes...

thanks,
guillem

Message #58 received at 413436@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: PT FINDORA INTERNUSA <sankhokaihatsuco.ltd@outlook.com>

To: me <marketing01@findora.com>

Subject: P.O 22/09/2021

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 21:26:56 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello,

Good morning,

We have gone through your samples from a partner and Here is our  Order 
List. Please do bear in mind that we are very much in  need of this 
order, quote your competitive prices.

Kindly send the Order confirmation.

Your early reply will be much appreciated.

Best Regards,

Maryanah Erwin.

PT FINDORA INTERNUSA

Jln Pahlawan 66 Kec. Arjawinangun

45162 CIREBON West-Java INDONESIA

tel : +62 231 357334

fax: +62 231 357260

email: marketing@findora.com

[P.O22.09.2021.cab (application/zip, attachment)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.