On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 07:16:49PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Each time debconf is made to ask if a file should be "managed by > debconf", a fairy dies. > > There are better ways for the non-terminally-lazy. Read > debconf-devel(8). I object to this characterization. I read debconf-devel(8), specifically: ADVANCED PROGRAMING WITH DEBCONF Config file handling I thought we weren't supposed to "use debconf as a registry"? Some people will get mighty pissed if you use debconf as a registry and stomp on their config file. The config file is supposed to trump the debconf database, not the other way around. Your example is completely unconditional. The postinst just whaps the config file without so much as a by-your-leave. As you may have heard, 4.2.0 packages are currently in experimental pre-release. Now is a perfect time to offer me feedback on how you'd like to see XFree86's usage of debconf change. Hint, hint. -- G. Branden Robinson | There's nothing an agnostic can't Debian GNU/Linux | do if he doesn't know whether he branden@debian.org | believes in it or not. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Graham Chapman
Attachment:
pgp6zDGS88G7X.pgp
Description: PGP signature