[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Document the hooks in d-i?



On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 12:16:28AM +0200, Thorsten Sauter wrote:
> * Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com> [2003-05-01 17:19]:
> > I believe we should make a document listing all the available hooks in
> > debian-installer, and their usage.
> yes
> 
> > Are there more hooks?
> of course :)
> 
    [ more hooks that made it all ready  to doc/html/hooks.html ]
> 
> 
> 
> I plan to include the following:
>    
>    /var/lib/partconf/block.d/*
> 
>        partconf execute for each partition every script in this
> 	   directory, so some udebs can place scripts here, and then block
> 	   the output of some partitions; very useful for raid/lvm support
> 

IMHO that should also be documented, so I supply a patch.

However, my real question is how to supply a patch to this list?

Attached?
Or in the E-mail?


Geert Stappers

Index: doc/html/hooks.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/debian-boot/debian-installer/doc/html/hooks.html,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -r1.1 hooks.html
--- doc/html/hooks.html 2 May 2003 18:24:20 -0000       1.1
+++ doc/html/hooks.html 8 May 2003 16:35:19 -0000
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
 <html>
+  <!-- handcrafted HTML, no need to search a source file or generator -->
   <head>
     <title>d-i hooks</title>
   </head>
@@ -49,6 +50,14 @@
         common.sh with the selection harddisk as argument. The script
         can the do whatever is needed to partition a harddisk on this
         arch (eg running fdisk (text) or cfdisk (slang))</dd>
+
+      <dt>/var/lib/partconf/block.d/* [partconf?]</dt>
+
+      <dd>partconf execute for each partition every script in this
+        directory, so some udebs can place scripts here, and then block
+       the output of some partitions; very useful for raid/lvm support
+       <BR>( planned to included by Thorsten Sauter )
+      </dd>

     </dl>




Reply to: