Re: Proposed handling of generated configuration files (Re: stop the "manage with debconf" madness)
On Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:49:50 +0300, Jarno Elonen <elonen@iki.fi> said:
> Thanks, I read the thread. So the reason was that configuration file
> generation is mostly done in postinst scripts? I didn't quite get
> why it couldn't in practically all cases be done in preinst (or even
> a completely new installation if required), though. Could you
> provide some counter-example(s)?
my package contains /usr/bin/floobargle that I use to analize
the system to create a configuration file. /usr/bin/floobargle is
not available until unpacked.
Or, I have a file I can generate, which is in
/usr/lib/foo/bar.conf; and this file is large, and changes often, I
do not want to embed it inline in my packages preinst file.
> I doubt the (pre-)dependencies on tools used for generation would
> really be a problem - the generation scripts are usually quite
> simple and can usually use pretty standard tools that don't change
> much.
It depends on what I use to generate the file. A few xml
files, a little bit of xsl transofrms, and you have a ton of
prepends.
manoj
--
"I was recently on a tour of Latin America, and the only regret I have
was that I didn't study Latin harder in school so I could converse
with those people." Danforth Quayle
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: