Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?

On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 07:58:26PM +0100, Massimo Dal Zotto wrote: > In my opinion now that we have debconf we should mandate its use by > policy. No. We. Should. Not. If you want every package to use debconf, that's fine and wonderful. Go make a list of the ones that don't, write patches so that

Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?

Massimo Dal Zotto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I wrote an automatic installer (which worked) for slink, but I had to > spend weeks to adapt the postinst scripts of debian packages to it, > and I didn't want to repeat all the work for potato and woody. This was my experience, too. > In my opinio

Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?

> > That is *completely* the wrong attitude. We're all volunteers; we're not > here to be forced to do anything. > > Cheers, > aj, wondering if he's going to have to do the "must" rant yet again > > -- > Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I don't speak for any

Re: Bug#122817: base-files: Please provide profile.d hook in /etc/profile

On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 03:04:39PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > You are wrong here. Sample: > > - I want to provide a package with a lot of useful bash functions/aliases w/o > changing any program Write scripts and put them in /usr/local/bin. > - I want my users to have a

Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?

On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 12:19:51AM +, Julian Gilbey wrote: > To pseudo-quote Anthony Towns on this one: policy is not a stick to > hit lazy maintainers with. Oh, come now. *Anything* can be a stick to hit lazy maintainers with. Just so long as they get beaten. -- G. Branden Robinson

Re: Bug#122817: base-files: Please provide profile.d hook in /etc/profile

On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 02:20:19PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > > The profile.d thing has been suggested several times (see the archived > bugs for the base-files package) and I have always rejected it because > it is against the spirit of policy when it says: > (..) > > If we followed this, no

Processed: Re: Bug#122817: base-files: Please provide profile.d hook in /etc/profile

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 122817 debian-policy Bug#122817: base-files: Please provide profile.d hook in /etc/profile Bug reassigned from package `base-files' to `debian-policy'. > severity 122817 wishlist Bug#122817: base-files: Please provide profile.d hook in /etc/pr

Re: Bug#122817: base-files: Please provide profile.d hook in /etc/profile

reassign 122817 debian-policy severity 122817 wishlist thanks On 7 Dec 2001, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pena wrote: > Package: base-files > Version: 3.0 > Severity: important > Tag: patch > > First of all, I'm setting this bug as important due to the fact that, even > if it works as is some packag

Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 04:35:17PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: >> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Anthony Towns wrote: >> > If debconf isn't good enough that everyone's not using it voluntarily >> > (lilo has been converted *from* debconf), then the obvious thing to do >> > is to improve debconf, not try to for

Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 04:35:17PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > It's some work for a maintainer to convert a package that simply uses > things like "cat < the maintainer is for any reason not willing to convert his package (he > might even refuse a patch) the only way to force him to make this chang

Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?

On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, VALETTE Eric wrote: > I have been discussing quite a lot on different debian mailing list on a > way to automate debian installation. The final and almost unfiform > answer was to use debconf in non-interactive mode. > > The technical reason is that due to use of tty the follow

Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?

> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns writes: Anthony> Consider, eg, #90676. What is the problem here? If a program tries to read an input from STDIN, then IMHO it is not debconf compliant, as you will still have problems with automatic installations. This is just one bug I have seen with packa