Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:59:30 -0700 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] rewrite of the merge(1) utility Message-ID: <160018322.PNgSqJIXNP@ralph.baldwin.cx> In-Reply-To: <20150814193146.GI1872@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20150726012619.GP21594@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <2075305.SMzFbTQNGK@ralph.baldwin.cx> <20150814193146.GI1872@zxy.spb.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, August 14, 2015 10:31:46 PM Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 10:52:04AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > > On Friday, August 14, 2015 10:39:51 AM Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 12:14:28AM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 08:23:02AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, August 13, 2015 04:13:43 PM Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:00:06PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, July 26, 2015 03:26:22 AM Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was botherd to not have the merge(1) utility available in base (for etcupdate) > > > > > > > > when building base WITHOUT_RCS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I have rewritten a merge(1) utility which should be compatible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I used the 3-way merge code from the fossil VCS instead of making it call diff3. > > > > > > > > All I have done from the fossil code is adapting it to use sbuf(9). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The bonus for end users is the merge from fossil can resolve situation where the > > > > > > > > diff3 in base cannot. (which explains a "failure" with the GNU RCS test suite) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > meaning etcupdate will be more happy merge configuration files. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! This will save me from having to hack etcupdate to use diff3 instead > > > > > > > of merge. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, can I use etcupdate to update /etc w/o source tree? > > > > > > I.e. I take from new distro /var/db/etcupdate and try to update /etc? > > > > > > > > > > etcupdate does a 3-way merge of an "old" stock /etc and a "new" stock /etc > > > > > into /etc. The "old" stock /etc is always stored in /var/db/etcupdate. > > > > > The "new" stock /etc has to come from somewhere. One option is to generate > > > > > it from /usr/src (e.g. after a buildworld). However, you can also pregenerate > > > > > tarballs from a /usr/src tree on one machine and then use those tarballs > > > > > instead of generating an /etc tree from /usr/src on another machine. I've > > > > > used this for upgrades of a cluster of machines where a single machine would > > > > > build release "images" that were basically a buildworld + an 'etcupdate build' > > > > > from the corresponding src tree. I then used 'etcupdate -t /path/to/tarball' > > > > > to update /etc after installing the new world. > > > > > > > > > > The idea is that for something like freebsd-update one could ship the latest > > > > > etcupdate build tarball on each update to do a full 3-way merge of /etc. > > > > > > > > What about /var/db/etcupdate from install media? > > > > Can I use this? > > > > What best way for work with /var/db/etcupdate from install media > > > > (storing, saving and etc)? > > > > > > As I see, /var/db/etcupdate/current match installed version. > > > Is this enough? > > > How I use this? > > > > There are a few ways. Newer installs do bootstrap it for you, so if you > > follow the traditional source upgrade method you can just run 'etcupdate' > > in place of 'mergemaster'. If you do not want to have a /usr/src tree, > > how are you updating your world? > > yes, I don't want to have /usr/src tree. > I have buld host and run release.sh. > After done I use R/ftp/*.txz for extract on target host. > I see var/db/etcupdate/current in base.txz. > But I don't cleanly understund etcupdate: > - is this enough (var/db/etcupdate/current from base.txz)? > - what is best way to preserve var/db/etcupdate/current before > extract? > - do I need some work for record changes in /etc? In this model, I think etcupdate isn't really what you need/want. For one, if you extract base.txz it already overwrites your files in /etc and loses any local changes (including any files that etcupdate would upgrade). It doesn't lose new files like /etc/fstab or /etc/rc.conf, but if you make changes to existing files (like /etc/ttys) then extracting base.txz will overwrite those with the stock versions. If you wanted to not overwrite /etc then you could use etcupdate to merge in the changes to /etc instead. However, you would need to do something like this: 1) Ignore /etc and /var/db/etcupdate/current when you extract base.txz via --exclude. 2) Extract just /var/db/etcupdate/current from base.txz to some other temporary location (/some/tmp/path). 3) Create a new tarball from that tree ( tar cfy foo.tbz -C /some/tmp/path/var/db/etcupdate/current . ) 4) Use foo.tbz with etcupdate as the tarball (etcupdate -t foo.tbz) Alternatively, you could save on steps 2 + 3 by patching your release process to run 'etcupdate build' (you can see where the current release Makefile runs 'etcupdate extract' and use 'build' with the same options). -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?160018322.PNgSqJIXNP>