[Bug 206866] [handbook] Replace mergemaster(8) with newer etcupdate(8) utility for source upgrades

[bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206866

Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des at FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Assignee|freebsd-doc at FreeBSD.org     |des at FreeBSD.org
             Status|New                         |Open
                 CC|                            |des at FreeBSD.org

--- Comment #3 from Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des at FreeBSD.org> ---
> Modified to use the newer etcupdate(8) utility by Ben Woods.

It doesn't *use* anything.  It *describes* etcupdate(8).

> Note that etcupdate has replaced mergemaster(8) [...] as the latter
> required the user to review all of the differences [...]

That's not true.  With the correct configuration, mergemaster(8) is
just as easy to use as etcupdate(8) in most cases.  The main
(user-visible) difference is that etcupdate(8) does three-way merges,
which make conflict resolution much easier.

> If it shows an unexpected result, or if it fails with an error about
> a missing reference tree, then it is likely that etcupdate needs to
> be bootstrapped.

It only needs to be bootstrapped if it says it hasn't been already.
If it shows an "unexpected result" that isn't an error, then you've
either bootstrapped it from a source tree that doesn't match your
running system or simply not run it after your last update.

> svn checkout -r YOURREVISION https://svn.FreeBSD.org/base/head/
> /PATH/TO/SAVE/SOURCE/TREE

Since you're building from source, it's reasonable to assume that you
already have a working copy.  In that case, it is faster to revert it
to the correct version than to check out a new copy.  Also, svn:// is
faster than https://, and don't assume that people are running head.

> Before using etcupdate, it is recommended to have a backup or
> snapshot of /etc.

It's probably not a bad idea, but I'm uncomfortable with actually
recommending it.  It gives the reader the impression that etcupdate is
unreliable.

Finally, and most importantly, you don't describe how to resolve
conflicts ('etcupdate merge').

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.