W dniu 04.01.2021 o 20:27, Enji Cooper pisze: > >> On Jan 4, 2021, at 11:15 AM, Jeffrey Bouquet <jbtakk_at_iherebuywisely.com> wrote: > > … > >>> Dear Enji, >>> >>> to satisfy your curiosity: Yes, I have tried etcupdate(8) a few times >>> over years. It works fine, but I don't like the idea of editing >>> conflicted files. >>> >>> I won't complain about etcupdate(8), but please leave mergemaster(8) >>> as is. I believe we need both: solid, fast black boxes driven it auto >>> mode and fragile tools in the base. mergemaser is rather not a potential >>> security hole in the system. > > Hi Jeffrey and Marek, > Could you please be more specific in your concerns? I don’t mind helping resolve them, but unfortunately the concerns noted above are a bit nebulous. Dear Enji, it's probably high time to stop escalating this thread. Some people like the way in which mergemaster copes with updates, some people like etcupdate. With Git clean and smudge filters applied on local repo and $FreeBSD$ IDs regenerated, mergemaster still works great and is more ergonomic in use for at least two people. Kind regards, -- Marek Zarychta
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:26 UTC