Mauricio Fern?ndez [mailto:batsman.geo / yahoo.com] wrote:

> mmm sounds good. The only problem is that since this will 
> make everybody use the latest version always, I'll really 
> have to make sure that rpa-base isn't broken and can still 
> update itself, etc :-) 
> 
> IIRC such a problem happened once, around 0.2.0-28 or maybe 
> 0.2.1-1, where rpa-base wouldn't install itself correctly 
> when using a non-standard $prefix. I fixed it quickly and 
> AFAIK nobody was bitten.  Anyway, in the worst possible case, 
> you'd just have to install rpa-base from the .tar.gz again 
> (it would adopt the installed ports, etc). Not quite as 
> convenient as a simple  rpa install rpa-base  but still 
> acceptable. And this won't be a problem when I make  rpa 
> install rpa-base  itself atomic.

Maybe a backup copy of the old will help in some cases (There's a term for
this used by backup operators but I forgot :), so that if the new one fails,
system will automatically revert to old -something along the line of

rescue
	# revert to old
	puts "base malfxn: reverting to old base"
	#
end

ie if you can catch it though.. but don't know if it is possible however..

> Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
> batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com

kind regards -botp