Re: configuration of debian systems [Was: Re: Unidentified subject!]
On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 01:52:31PM +0200, goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de wrote:
> Joey's and my work both include forntends for console, whiptail and
> html. Altough at the moment he is further with his developement. His
> work looks nice, but it looks more complicated to me, but that might
> also be my perl knoledges fault.
Didn't know he had one as well ! Sheesh, talk about a lot of proposals. Maybe
everyone should start working together, then we'll have a working solution in
weeks !
> > package does look different, that's why I don't have a widget that
> > covers a whole .conf file, only pieces of it. If you don't
> > understand what I mean I'll provide some examples :)
>
> All proposals so far say that all questions must be asked via one
> command (dpkg-question in my case). That command gets the kind of
> question as option and from that deduces the look&feel. The maintainer
> can only select the meaning of the question not the look&feel. He can
> say that he wants a font selector or a file selector or a yes/no
> question. He can also group such questions together as in Joeys
> implementation, which I find a good idea. A Group of questions would
> then appear in its own submenu and all questions in a group would be
> asked together.
ahh, I was thinking along the lines of a GTK configure thingie and maybe later
one in ncurses that looks like whiptail/dialog. But you're right, the
maintainer shouldn't have any control over what the front-end looks like; just
the conf file.
I know one doesn't want a bunch of gtk packages lying on a server boxicle,
maybe a server + protocol for remote configuring... IMHO that would make
Debian's configuration really cool.
> Linuxconf needs a C++ module for every package it can configure. I
> don't know how good the module concept is in respect to different
> versions, but programming a C++ interface isn't trivial and you have
> to compile linuxconf for every change to see if it works.
>
euwww
> In my proposal configuration via a prerecored database is just a
> different frontend to the overall configration. instead of asking the
> user, the database will be asked. In fact I want to use the very
> mechanism to first prerecord the configuration onto a temporary
> database and only at the end realy do the configuring. That way the
> system keeps its state until everything is tuned and the suer can
> cancel if he makes a mistake.
>
Never thought of it that way. I love _modular_ :))
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sarel Botha | Computer & | +27 341 81341
(sjb@dundee.lia.net) | Accounting | BOX 2065, Dundee
| Services | 3000, South Africa
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: