On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 05:50:41PM +0000, Justin B Rye wrote: > > It's a permanent choice (unless the debconf database is tampered with or > > the package purged and reinstalled). It's sole purpose is to capture the > > current rules that the administrator clearly wants to use, more as a > > safety-net against removing the current mechanism, rebooting or flushing, > > and then cursing that all the rules are gone. > > Then under what circumstances should I answer "no"? I mean, it sounds > as if I should *always* say yes, but it's "Default: false"! So what > am I missing? The case I originally thought of was an administrator already having rules defined, and not wanting to overwrite them with these. However, there are actually only really two use cases: - fresh installation, in which case he wants 'yes', or - upgrade from before this behaviour was introduced, so the rules file already exists - but as this is a package for loading that file at boot it should match what's running anyway! So on reflection, I propose changing it to default 'yes'. -- Jonathan Wiltshire jmw@debian.org Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw 4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC 74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature