Re: Bug#189370: acknowledged by developer (irrelevant)
From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
Subject: Re: Bug#189370: acknowledged by developer (irrelevant)
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 04:21:17 -0500
> >> I have an impression that such Policy understanding prevents sane
> >> advance of packages.
>
> I am sorry, I do think that not preserving user changes is not
> an advancement.
I said to you once before but the new mechanism preserves
user change much clearly than the former one within the
new mechanism. It could lost user change only at transition
from the old mechanism (conffile) to the new mechanism (configuration
file).
> My as yet incomplete mechanism is to use debconf andother
> means to generate a current configuration file on the fly, and use
> ucf to prompt, somewhat like dpkg, as below:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Configuration file \`$dest_file'
> ==> File on system created by you or by a script.
> ==> File also in package provided by package maintainer.
> What would you like to do about it ? Your options are:
> Y or I : install the package maintainer's version
> N or O : keep your currently-installed version
> D : show the differences between the versions
> 3 or T : show a thre way difference between current, older,
> and new versions of the file
> M : Do a 3 way merge between current, older,
> and new versions of the file [Very Experimental]
> Z : start a new shell to examine the situation
> The default action is to keep your current version.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
This doesn't work for texmf.cnf which also I told you
once before. If the default is to keep your current
version then many TeX related packages should fail to
install.
The current mechanism is, at least at present, only one
solution which provides sufficiently flexible handling
and also preserves user changes.
Thanks, 2003-4-19(Sat)
--
Debian Developer & Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@debian.org>
Department of Math., Tokushima Univ.
Reply to: