On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:18:33AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On a separate but related topic, I think a much better approach would > be to handle configuration as a step entirely separate from the > install phase. Let the install be entirely quiet, and let packages > have intelligent defaults. If the package absolutely must be > configured before it can be used, then let it be non-functional until > someone actually calls dpkg-configure (which would be just like > dpkg-reconfigure except that's the only time the questions would be > asked). I don't see how this would be much of an improvement. While I agree that packages for which intelligent defaults are possible should simply ship with those defaults set, there are enough packages that don't have sensible defaults to make debconf a good idea. If dpkg-configure is called separately, how does the admin know when there are packages for which it should be called? And if the admin is automatically notified of this, why is this better than simply calling dpkg-configure then and there? Although debconf notes are frequently abused, I haven't given up hope that current problems with other uses of debconf will sort themselves out as the techniques and rules become more familiar to maintainers. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpe9UcW0pzKP.pgp
Description: PGP signature