Re: future role of debconf
bug1 wrote:
> If debconf is going to play a central role for the woody installer it
> may be beneficial to rewrite it in c.
>
> Perl has its uses, but its a pretty big overhead for the installer if
> its only used for debconf.
A C version will be absolutely essential. It may or may not become the
primary version, and might not have to be a complete implementation,
just the parts we need.
> How stable do you consider the functionality provided by debconf, do you
> think it will change much ?
It's quite stable. It's based on a spec that is over one year old and
had its last major change 6 months ago. See specification.html in
debconf-doc.
> Im thinking jobs such as these would be good to get started early on in
> the woody cycle.
>
> I dont understand debconf too well, and my perl is pretty rusty, but i
> could work it out...
This would indeed be a good thing to get started on, and we can do some
parts of it before we have a fully-developed idea of what the new system
will look like. My advice is: ignore the database format for now, that
will change. Don't bother with the frontend UI, we will have to decide
what kind of UI we will be using later.
The parts to do first are the data structures (to hold data about
templates and questions -- this includes loading template files) and the
part that communicates with scripts. If you can get somewhere on those,
that'll be a very good foundation for the rest of the program.
--
see shy jo
Reply to: