On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 10:46:31PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On another note(not for woody), would it be beneficial to have this file not
> be a conffile?
That'd let boot-floppies or base-config mess with it if they thought
they could choose better defaults (eg, people who install "testing" or
"unstable" might default to not having --force-overwrite).
> My direct question to you, Anthony, is whether you would accept this disk
> space fix.
I like to leave such things up to the maintainer where possible. Avoid
doing anything remotely risky, make sure it's tested in all the common
cases as well as whatever you're fixing, don't change the behaviour for
any situation where it used to work, and so on. Run it by Wichert. Post it
here with an explanation of what's going on if you still have any doubts.
If after all that, you and Wichert (as dpkg maintainers) think it's
appropriate to upload that along with the dpkg.cfg fix, I'm happy to go
with it.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``BAM! Science triumphs again!''
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif
Attachment:
pgpgIwDuQYeOa.pgp
Description: PGP signature