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

Re: [devel] Debconf or not debconf

Re: Re: [devel] Debconf or not debconf [Jim Penny <jpenny@universal-fasteners.com>, Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 10:50:29AM -0400, <[🔎] 20030702105029.6c494b6e.jpenny@universal-fasteners.com>]
> It breaks 100% of stunnel installations.  The old stunnel was command
> line oriented, the current one is configuration file oriented.  It would
> be very difficult to write a converter.

Well, it broke my installation. I read the -devel thread over the last
days, and even then I thought "It won't concern me as I'm using stunnel
from /etc/inetd.conf instead of a stand-alone service". In the end, I
could no longer fetch mail via imaps after upgrading to the current
Sarge version of stunnel.

I think the main point about Debian is to provide a smooth upgrade of
packages, and in this case, a debconf note about "you will have to write
a stunnel configuration file" would have been *much* nicer than just
breaking the program. One has to tune his system anyway after the
upgrade, so I would have been very glad had Debian told me what to do.
(Which is just one "Enter" press more for those who already know.)

On the other hand, not changing the interface is even nicer. But if
upstream decides to change it, there are probably good reasons to follow

And yes, I read the README.Debian, the manpage etc. But a debconf note
would have sped things up further.

Christoph Berg <cb@df7cb.de>, http://www.df7cb.de
Wohnheim D, 2405, Universität des Saarlandes, 0681/9657944

Attachment: pgpfZrF7m4cgm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: