Re: Interactive installation [was Re: Caldera installation...]

["James R. Van Zandt" <jrv@vanzandt.mv.com>]

"Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk> writes:
>I'm repeating all the text of the previous message, because it seemed to
>have got lost in the futile thread about text config files.  It's only
>by luck that I didn't delete it without reading it. 
>
>
>"James R. Van Zandt" wrote:
>  >I think it will have to be the other way around: packages should
>  >indicate that they do *not* have interactive configurations.
>  >I propose this be done with a new field in the control file:
...

Thanks.

>I think it ought to be policy; though not until the mechanism to support 
>non-interactive methods has been put in place.  

Here I disagree.  By my rough estimate, only 10% or so of the packages
have interactive installations.  The other 90% only need to be
labeled.  That job does not have to wait until we implement a
non-interactive method.  It can start as soon as we decide how to
label them.  Likewise, modifying debhelper to mark the packages with
no postinst at all (1/3 of the packages) or only automatically
generated scripts, can start as soon as we decide on that labeling.

		   - Jim Van Zandt