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

Re: [PATCH] Better flexibility to control system base installation

On Saturday 12 August 2006 10:35, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Does anyone has comments about it?

(Ignoring the debug stuff which was already removed in a later version of 
the patch.)

This patch gives me the feeling that functionality is being added because 
it is possible, not because it is really needed. IMO there this patch at 
least adds a certain amount of redundancy.

I can understand the desire for a specific debootstrap script, but I feel 
adding support for _preseeding_ INCLUDES and EXCLUDES is redundant, 
especially when targeted at CDDs:
- CDDs should be able to use the include and exclude files instead of
- includes and excludes may not even be needed anymore now that you can
  use a completely tailored debootstrap script instead;
- Colin recently already added the option to preseed installation of extra
  packages in pkgsel (pkgsel/include), which is a much more safe place
  to install additional packages.

For the debootstrap script, I wonder if that really needs to be 
preseedable or if it would be better to have base-installer look for a 
script with a fixed name in a fixed place. It is only really of use to 
people who will probably already be creating their own images.

IMO with all these different options to include, exclude, customize, etc. 
we are starting to run the risk of making d-i a maintenance and 
documentation hell and also of not being able to support people anymore 
who use these options incorrectly and thus create problems for 
themselves. Do we really want to make it this easy for people to mess 
with the base system installation?

Of course, others may disagree with me. I have no problem with that.

If the option to preseed includes and excludes _is_ added, I suggest to 
make it so that both comma and space separated lists are accepted (see 
Colin's implementation of pkgsel/include).


Attachment: pgp5WR3Ha00gd.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: