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

Re: r50470 - trunk/packages/kbd-chooser/debian

On Monday 17 December 2007, Joey Hess wrote:
> If the keymap has already been installed earlier in the installation,
> why can't console-* notice that there is a keymap installed, and skip
> asking about it? Why do we need a separate way to communicate this to
> console-* at all?

Because a dpkg-reconfigure needs to ask the question even if a keymap is 

> If some other communication than creating the keymap file is needed
> for reasons I don't understand, creating a file not in /tmp seems very
> doable.

But is just as random. And it leaves the possibility that the file will 
remain on the target system for all time if finish-install is not run or 
not completely run for some reason [1].

I decided on /tmp as the file really _is_ a temporary file: exists only for 
the duration of the installation. And I made sure it was in a temp 
directory that could be said to be "controlled" by D-I because of its name.
As you said yourself: there's absolutely no attack vector.

> The other option would be debconf preseeding, and preseeding
> console-data/keymap/policy seen should avoid the question. And would be
> less ugly than a flag file.

But it would affect an 'aptitude reinstall' of the package. As the user did 
not _himself_ ask for a seen flag to be set here (as in the case of 
preseeding [2]), I did not consider this a very nice solution.

Also, post-base-installer is pretty early for messing with preseeding 
in /target. We normally only do that in pkgsel. I agree it could be done, 
but it does not seem that much cleaner to me than a flag file.


[1] I'm aware of course that such a system is in principle broken anyway.
[2] I've been wondering a few times whether we shouldn't just reset all seen 
flags in the debconf database in /target at the end of an install anyway. 
If we did that my objection would be resolved too.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: