Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Nicolas Sebrecht <email@example.com> wrote:
>> The 23/08/12, Ike Devolder wrote:
>>> No there is no package providing those files.
>>> why ?
>>> if arch would provide you with defaults every time the defaults get updated
>>> you would get *.pacnew files in your etc. since those files are depending on
>>> your system and are user choice it would not be good to provide those.
>> What upgrade are you talking about? OP is talking about configuration
>> files not willing to be upgraded for years (if not for their whole life
>> I tend to think it's a mistake.
>> Nicolas Sebrecht
> If the files are provided in linked packages to their functionality,
> there'd be a new .pacnew everytime the linked package was updated.
According to the pacman man page (and my own experience), a .pacnew
is created only if the file from the new package is different from
the file from the old package. If both are the same, then no .pacnew
is generated even if the user modified the file.
It would therefore be a good idea to have these files in a package,
because if an option is added to one of the files then it will be