broken VIM update on FC3??
Paul Howarth
paul at city-fan.org
Fri Aug 12 07:14:13 UTC 2005
On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 17:29 -0400, Tony Nelson wrote:
> At 4:07 PM -0400 8/11/05, taharka wrote:
> ...
> >After both updates, I received the following message,
> >warning: /etc/vimrc created as /etc/vimrc.rpmnew
> >
> >Sho nuff, if I look in /etc, there is a file vimrc.rpmnew.
> >
> >Any one else seeing this? Also, what needs to be done about it?
>
> $ diff /etc/vimrc /etc/vimrc.rpmnew
> $
>
> There are no differences, so you might as well remove /etc/vimrc.rpmnew.
> If there had been differences, you'd probably want to merge them into the
> vimrc file.
>
> But why was such a file created anyway? I'd have thought that there would
> be at least minimal merge logic which would not make .rpmnew files when the
> file would be identical with the original.
My understanding of the logic for configuration files in package updates
is:
if old-rpm-config-file is identical to new-rpm-config-file
then
leave the installed-config-file unchanged
elsif installed-config-file is identical to old-rpm-config-file
then
install new-rpm-config-file
elsif config file marked (noreplace) in rpm package
then
install new-rpm-config-file as new-rpm-config-file.rpmnew
else
rename installed-config-file installed-config-file.rpmsave
install new-rpm-config-file
endif
Given that vimrc has not changed over many releases, one might expect
that vimrc.rpmnew files shouldn't get created, but they always do. I
believe that the reason for this is that /etc/vimrc is included in both
the vim-minimal and vim-common; there's no conflict between these two
packages because the vimrc file is the same in both packages, but rpm
seems to create the .rpmnew file anyway.
Paul.
--
Paul Howarth <paul at city-fan.org>
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list