Handbook Talk:AMD64/Portage/Tools
Before creating a discussion or leaving a comment, please read about using talk pages. To create a new discussion, click here. Comments on an existing discussion should be signed using
~~~~:
== Discussion title ==
{{Talk|date = 2024-05-13}}
A comment [[User:Larry|Larry]] 13:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
: A reply [[User:Sally|Sally]] 06:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
:: Your reply ~~~~
Add cfg-update
Would also be worth including 'cfg-update' which I use, too! Mjeveritt (talk) 10:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- This utility is not included in stage tarballs by default and - no offense to Rich - hasn't had a new release since Sep 30, 2014. We'll mention the Cfg-update article on this discussion page and call it good. We can't cover all the choices in the handbook. --Maffblaster (talk) 05:24, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Recommend dispatch-conf over etc-update
As stated in the article, etc-update "is not as simple to use as dispatch-conf, nor as fully featured", and "does not preserve the old versions of the config files. Once a file is updated, the old version is gone forever. [...] using etc-update is significantly less safe than using dispatch-conf when desiring to keep old configuration files.".
I can see no advantage to using etc-update. To avoid any confusion, and to orient users towards the safer option, I think either a note recommending dispatch-conf over etc-update could be put at the start of the etc-update section, or the section removed completely (i.e. moved to a new article and archived).
From what I can gather from google and from forums, I can see nobody preferring etc-update, save from by habit.
Also, perhaps a link to the dispatch-conf wiki page, that has information on advanced configuration, would be useful.
Ris (talk) 18:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- The note has been added. I think it should be mentioned as long as it's included with Portage - but certainly dispatch-conf is preferred. See Special:Diff/1026219/1026285. --Maffblaster (talk) 05:24, 1 November 2021 (UTC)