From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 19 11:49:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F2FE16A4CF for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 11:49:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp4.server.rpi.edu (smtp4.server.rpi.edu [128.113.2.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A375643D49 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 11:49:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by smtp4.server.rpi.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0JJn1t3018842; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:49:01 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <400C3141.40505@centtech.com> References: <400C012E.4040002@mail.ru> <400C0E5F.5010606@potentialtech.com> <400C2CF3.6080401@centtech.com> <400C3141.40505@centtech.com> Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:48:59 -0500 To: Eric Anderson From: Garance A Drosihn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Bill Moran Subject: Re: question on mergemaster X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 19:49:08 -0000 At 1:34 PM -0600 1/19/04, Eric Anderson wrote: > >Here's my thoughts - first, you have to manually ask it to >run -I, then you have to also put in the autoupdate >line - if you mistype it, it just won't autoupdate, >it will prompt. Note that there were two different proposals. The "optimistic" one, and the "pessimistic" one. My concerns about streamlining were related to proposal described as: The optimistic way to do this would be to have some sort of switch to mergemaster to tell it to go into autoupdate mode, and it will only ask for files that ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ contain a "negative magic" like: ^^^^^^^ # mergemaster noautoreplace This is easier to implement than the pessimistic one, IMO, but it also comes with a greater risk. I don't like that risk. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu