[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposed handling of generated configuration files (Re: stop the "manage with debconf" madness)

On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 02:20:00AM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:

> * Matt Zimmerman
>  > As was explained in detail, in order to do anything useful with that
>  > information, it is necessary to be able to show the user the proposed
>  > changes to the configuration file.  It is completely unhelpful to say:
>  >
>  > "You have modified this configuration file, and it has also been updated
>  > by the package maintainer.  Do you want to replace it with the version
>  > provided by the package maintainer?"
>  >
>  > Without showing the user the new version.
>   Of course, this question will be shown in the postinst, if the generated
>  file differs from the previously generated one and the user has modified
>  the one in /etc.

Yes, and this was the main question that I brought up at the end of my
original message: is it worth sacrificing preconfiguration, or is there a
better way?  So far, there is no clear consensus.

>  I see your problem when you insist on asking on asking all questions at
>  the configure stage -- personally, I don't think delaying the actual
>  generating of the configuration file (and asking the question about
>  overwriting the old file) to the postinst stage is *that* bad.

This is the sort of input that I was soliciting.  Personally, I think that
preconfiguration is very important, since it _greatly_ simplifies initial
installation and upgrades (where a large number of questions are asked) and
allows the rest of the installation to proceed unattended in the absence of

 - mdz

Reply to: