Bug#162120: Support #162120

2003-07-10 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:35:44 -0500, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 04:43:11PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> >> Eh? Suppose I do echo "" > config file, you are going to blow my >> >> changes away and "recreate the configuration as the package >> >> deems fit"

Re: Bug#176506: Proposal seconded...though very late..:-)

2003-07-10 Thread Mark Baker
Wouter Verhelst wrote: Op do 10-07-2003, om 18:21 schreef Christian Perrier: (if people are aware of other prompting-user-but-not-using-debconf packages, please let me know) exim, obviously :-) There were two reasons why I didn't change to debconf initially. Firstly almost all re

Bug#176506: Proposal seconded...though very late..:-)

2003-07-10 Thread Josip Rodin
On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 06:21:42PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > Well, I of course second this proposal, just being tracking down > packages who do not use debconf Speaking of which, I object to the proposal to go from "may" to "must". "should" needs to go inbetween. -- 2. That whic

Bug#176506: Proposal seconded...though very late..:-)

2003-07-10 Thread Wouter Verhelst
Op do 10-07-2003, om 18:21 schreef Christian Perrier: > Well, I of course second this proposal, just being tracking down > packages who do not use debconf > > There seems to be very few of them, some with quite good reasons for > delaying the change (see #184979 for base-passwd). > > At this

Re: Bug#176506: Proposal seconded...though very late..:-)

2003-07-10 Thread Aaron M. Ucko
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > (if people are aware of other prompting-user-but-not-using-debconf > packages, please let me know) One I've noticed is lirc (nontrivial to fix... see #162933). -- Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org) Finger [EMAIL PROTEC

Bug#176506: Proposal seconded...though very late..:-)

2003-07-10 Thread Christian Perrier
Well, I of course second this proposal, just being tracking down packages who do not use debconf There seems to be very few of them, some with quite good reasons for delaying the change (see #184979 for base-passwd). At this time, I have foundĀ : anacron (lazy maintainerĀ ?) base-passwd (good

Re: Bug#162120: Support #162120

2003-07-10 Thread Thomas Hood
On Wed, 2003-07-09 at 23:43, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > At this point, we are indeed supposed to preserve user > changes. User changes can be echo "" > /etc/filename, or rm > /etc/filename. If it were clear that removal were a "change" then we would not be having this discussion. The fac