Re: apt-listchanges, dpkg-preconfigure ordering in apt.conf
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 10:31:46PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > Unfortunately, I will still have to read the control file in order to get
> > source package information, unless you want to add that. Since Source: can
>
> Er why? Tho chagelog has the source package name after you extract it.
As an optimization, I skip all processing of debs that are from a source
package that I've already read changelogs for. Reading control.tar.gz or the
status file is much faster than getting the changelog out of a large .deb.
Depending on where the changelog happens to be in the archive, you may have
to decompress and read the entire data.tar.gz.
IMHO, the changelog should be part of control.tar.gz.
> > > You should also really be using /etc/apt for your config file - there is a
> > > subdir for a reason.. Having it in the same format as APT's is also a sane
> > > idea (talk to bod again)
>
> > I'm all for this. I can start writing my configuration in
> > /etc/apt/apt.conf.d, and read it myself until a smart enough version of
> > apt is released. Where should I put my namespace? apt-listchanges::*?
> > APT::listchanges::*?
>
> You should not include any config data except to hook it into apt-get. The
> use can place the option they want in apt.conf proper according to your
> man page. The defaults should always be sufficient for 99% of the people.
> Include a sample/index in /usr/doc like APT does.
>
> APT::ListChanges is a fair section name.
I'm already asking the user for their choices at install time via debconf; why
shouldn't I put them into the config file? They can always be changed with
dpkg-reconfigure, or the user can ignore it altogether and override with
entries in apt.conf. I would much prefer to dump everything into the config
file at once.
--
- mdz
Reply to: