Re: dpkg.log reworked
On Fri, Jan 01, 1999 at 12:48:24PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > This still seems like you're trying to put wallpaper up over a hole in
> > the wall to me.. I don't see how this really solves any of the problems
> > with dpkg's interactivity or that sort of thing. At best ig gives you a
> > way to see what the output of the installation was selectively. Arguably
> > this is a good thing, a very good thing really. But this seems like the
> > wrong way to do it.
>
> Theres, the problem. This is meant to solve interactivity problems. It's
s/is/isn't/ I assume?
> meant to solve the problem of too much info flying by on a PII 450 that
> is shooting over 500 packages into the new system and to keep admins
> from having to baby sit the machine during a 486 install for 3 hours
> just see all the little tidbit (but sometimes very important) package
> messages that go by.
The ideal way to handle this IMO would be for apt to run do the logging
and such. My apologies for misunderstanding the intent of your idea. I
said before that logging the output of apt/dselect would be useful if it
was optional. I realize that doing it this way DOES require mods to the
dselect methods and to apt, but the mods to the dselect methods are easy
enough and the mod to apt would be good for the sake of doing things the
best way rather than the easiest.
--
I'm not supposed to mention that you can eat at Joe's if you want to.
Reply to: