>> Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We are supposed to minimize the number of questions. If we can go
> from "very rarely" to "never", that's already a gain.
Actually that's something I've been meaning to ask for a while now.
debconf has made question-less installation possible or at least not as
annoying -- anyone remember starting a dpkg -BORGiE run, going for a
coffee only to come back and find the process stopped after just five
minutes and forty packages? Well, it still happens on upgrades because
dpkg stops to ask if a configuration file should be replaced or not.
Is this avoiable somehow? (without resorting to things like FAI, which
I understand is oriented towards large installations)
> What's wrong with following policy when it says configuration files
> for which there is not a default which satifies almost everybody
> should not be managed by the conffile mechanism?
I read the bug discussion but I didn't really understood Ben's point.
Why does the file have to be a conffile? The contents of the file
should not really change once the user modified it, should it? In this
case there's nothing for the maintainer to tweak from version to
version, at least nothing that can affect positively a user who already
modified the file. The changes I can remember had to do with internal
documentation for the file or turning it into a pseudo-menu.
--
Marcelo | Item 13: List members in an initialization list in the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | order which they are declared
| -- Scott Meyers, Effective C++
