Hi, On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 07:20:00AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:59:28PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > > > Secondly I've already given my opinion on this kind of ad hoc > > > reaction to this kind of bug reports. We should either come up > > > with a coherent policy of how what postrm's can and can't do or > > > educate people to think before purging. > > > > Um, policy should never be done first, and I would hope that you know that. > > Have you read my argument? Putting prompts in the postrm/purge code on an > ad hoc basis is akin to aliasing rm to rm -i. Either they have to be > changed all at once or it is only going to cause more data loss as people > get used to being prompted. Who said anything about prompts? Just *don't remove user data in postrm, even when purging*. At all. Package, yes, conffiles, yes, logfiles, yes, user data, no. No prompting. Simple. See? Cheers, Emile. -- E-Advies - Emile van Bergen emile@e-advies.nl tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 http://www.e-advies.nl
Attachment:
pgpkKsmPyz0QG.pgp
Description: PGP signature