On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 04:10:59PM -0700, David Whedon wrote:
> > Interactivity would also be good for "failed to get console-data. [Skip]
> > [Abort]" sorts of options, which would probably be handy.
> As it stands if I get an E: message I put up a problemBox() and the user needs
> to hit continue, we try to continue,
Dunno if there's much point continuing on an E: message...
Anyway, debootstrap will now (once I test it some more and upload it,
anyway) accept a --boot-floppies argument as the first option, and if
it receives it, it'll redirect dpkg's stdin from /dev/null, and send
E:, I: and W:'s to &3. stdout and stderr will be just used by dpkg,
and could be sent to vt3 or whatever.
> Perhaps if debootstrap wants some sort of input it can send me a ?: with a
> prompt, I'll have the user fill in a text field and pass the response to
> debootstrap?
That's not a bad idea. If you make
?: bool Please just tell me: yes, or no?
pop up a yes/no dialogue, that'd probably work pretty well. Things other
than bool can just pop up a text dialogue, that way we can extend things
easily enough later.
> What we really need is a list of the sorts of interaction that we want to
> support.
We can probably live without it for the minute, at least...
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
PGP signature
