Re: Configuration file update behaviour change options
Raul Miller writes ("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
I think you're gravely mistaken. The last thing that dpkg needs is
the headache of not necessarily being able to talk to the user ...
I have at times considered providing a `hook' arrangement, but it's
not clear quite how this would work. What if the hook failed ? What
if the installation fails and you need to unwind ? How does dpkg
record which hooks have been called and which haven't ? Do they need
to be idempotent ?