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

Re: package configuration design

On Tue, Jul 28, 1998 at 02:39:52AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > No.  But that's unrelated to md5sums.
> > 
> > For that kind of cleanup we need to have packages say "I'm using this
> > value", and we need for package purge to take them off the list.
> Like a proposed "dpkg-vars --purge --package xxx" ?
> But I'm not talking about cleanups, but about upgrades. When you upgrade
> a package and it wants a new default, it does a DSET. Not the frontend
> can do 2 things: it can see the last update was made by a user and
> refuse to change the value, or if the last update was made by the package
> it changes the value. So it's the same as md5sums.

I see, I think.  If it wants to set a default it uses DSET.  If it NEEDS a
value set to something or changed, it does a SET?  Then SET should only be
used when absolutely necessary.

My thoughts were more along the lines of linuxconf but more modular..  Yours
seem to me more along the lines of a registry ala windoze..  How do you
propose to deal with the shortcomings of that system?  Seasoned veterans
won't want to use some cutesy front-end, they'd wanna pay with a config file
directly when changing settings.  They'd likely tollerate the front-end for
installation of a new package, but.

I'm not going to ask about corruption of the registry---this isn't windoze
here and I'm sure you've considered that already.

Attachment: pgp2jCwdipOOe.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: