Pacnew Feature Request

Feedback
1

I’m thinking when there will be problematic .pacnew files, specially on stable, if can be useful on the announcement to insert a warning to avoid merging those .pacnew files

2

If you checked the announcements before updating, you’d have seen it multiple times, especially on the stable branch.

2 Likes
3

.pacnew files must always be inspected and merged, but never blindly copied over the existing configuration files.

6 Likes
4

We have already got one

[Stable Update] 2025-05-04

Known issues and solutions

Please RTFT (Read This Fine Thread) first before reporting the same issues over and over again!

Note: Do not forget to review your .pacnew files:

Latest update on Testing branch had 3 .pacnew files:

[2025-05-09T17:46:20+0100] [ALPM] warning: /etc/hosts installed as /etc/hosts.pacnew
[2025-05-09T17:46:20+0100] [ALPM] warning: /etc/passwd installed as /etc/passwd.pacnew
[2025-05-09T17:46:20+0100] [ALPM] warning: /etc/shells installed as /etc/shells.pacnew
2 Likes
5

I always check the announcements and check pacnew files after an update but seems you have not understand what I mean or I have not been able to express myself…
in that link or announcement there is no warning regarding pacnew files like password, shadow etc.
I’m saying this because I’ve seen in EndeavourOS a warning not to merge those files…

4 Likes
6

if you install the pacnew checker (sorry, can’t recall exact package name and I’m booted into another distro), there are warnings for pacnews of crucial packages.

ok, i get what you are saying. I suppose, since philm has said he generally ignores pacnews, he should have no problem adding a “don’t bother to merge the shadow pacnew, people.” to the update announcement.

:wink:

1 Like
7

The Known Issues & Solutions wiki in the next update release should include specific information about how to manage these files in addition to the usual warning

I agree that these files do not need to be merged

1 Like
8

I’ve seen a warning in the announcements regarding, I think, /etc/passwd that shouldn’t be merged. So I didn’t, and all was well!

9

It was a long time ago - but IF you properly MERGED it, noting bad was the consequence.

… the .pacnew contained a minimal default - with very few entries
the original was … is … what it is.

Merge anything new into what is already present.
Don’t just replace …

1 Like
10
It's very nice...

1 Like
11

I admit:
I don’t get the message that is apparently to be conveyed with this screenshot of … knights in armor fighting - or whatever… :man_shrugging:

I usually get analogies, as bad as they sometimes may be.
But this one: I have nothing - I draw a blank

12

Same here. :wink:

I guess what you’re asking for, is for such warnings to be persistent for subsequent update threads, for those who might miss some updates?

Where did you read that? :astonished:

13

I think it is a (unwarranted or not) generalization of the decision to reinstate the community repo - just to mitigate the influx of problem reports due to this.

… the (empty) repo is now present again - no more error messages due to it.

It’s not that easy with other .pacnew files

… it’s the wrong message - IMO

2 Likes
14

Indeed; a sticking plaster to cover up a gaping wound …? :thinking: :man_facepalming:

Maybe we should add just one package to that repo — the Manjaro Pacnew Checker!

2 Likes
15

I would not characterize it in that manner.

I have no idea why one would deal with this “problem” in this way.

People are supposed to take care of the system they chose to be using. :man_shrugging:

3 Likes
16

It’s an exaggeration, but the point is, papering over the cracks can lead to more serious issues down the line.

i.e. how many other .pacnew files are getting ignored along the way?

1 Like
17

Yes, indeed.

2 Likes
18

I’ve found this text saved in 2018:

And now I repeat again - DO NOT SIMPLY REPLACE OR MERGE BLINDLY
In almost all cases, you should do nothing for the following pacnews:
/etc/passwd.pacnew
/etc/shadow.pacnew
/etc/gshadow.pacnew
/etc/group.pacnew
and I quoteth:

    Never, ever, ever, ever, ever merge the pacnew file for /etc/{passwd,shadow,gshadow,group} unless you want to make the new comments match aesthetically with your in-use user accounts database. The only practical difference that merging can ever cause is to accidentally delete users or mangle the whole file’s syntax and render your computer maybe unbootable.
3 Likes
19

And that would still be false.
… wherever this “text saved in 2018” came from …

prove me wrong - what was in the respective .pacnew files?

If properly merged, nothing bad would have happened. :man_shrugging:

20

I think there’s a couple of people here who do not properly understand the verb “to merge”. :wink:

6 Likes