Re: Configuration file update behaviour change options
> Now that I think about it, I think I'd prefer the "html as a user
> interface" approach. This let's people run with a command line
> interface, a ncurses interface, an emacs interface, an x- interface,
> whatever. It also simplifies and constrains that aspect of the
> system design. There's some security issues here, but they can be
> dealt with.
Check out http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/~jacs/wxwin.html for information on
wxWindows, the free multi-platform GUI. There's a guy who has an ncurses
port of version 1.5, and is working on the port of more recent versions.
I am considering using this to write graphical configuration tools for Debian
at some future date.
Regarding the dpkg post-processing tool and options to dpkg to prevent it
from installing the manual, info, etc., if the user desired, isn't this
something that is better handled by the system administrator using the shell
after the package installation has been completed?
-- Attention Ham Radio Operators: For information on "Linux for Hams", read
-- the World Wide Web page http://www.hams.com/LinuxForHams, or e-mail to
-- firstname.lastname@example.org .