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

Re: Integrate Knoppix in Debian (was: Re: Debian Enterprise?)

On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 06:53, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 07:18:17PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> > However, we are currently viewing debconf as a way to do a _minimum_ 
> > configuration of packages. Debconf overuse is usually reported as a bug.
> I think most of the objections to "debconf abuse" really fall into two
> categories: questions asked at too high of a priority, and use of
> debconf on files that should be conffiles instead (because there are
> sensible defaults that work for most users).  Adding low-priority
> questions would never fall under the first category of debconf abuse,
> and the second category is only an issue if the package currently uses
> conffiles.
> If there are conffiles involved, there are certainly trade-offs to be
> weighed.  Maybe the config file doesn't represent a sensible default, so
> shouldn't be a conffile.  Maybe the subproject's proposed settings
> should be incorporated into the conffile as defaults.  Maybe the
> conffile already represents the sensible default, and the subproject
> needs to re-evaluate the importance of this particular customization.
> Regardless, I don't think this is a new issue arising from the growth of
> subprojects, and I don't think it's an insurmountable one, either.

Great to hear.

> > We don't want to use, as a distribution, a single point of
> > configuration like debconf. I might be wrong or things might have
> > changed.
> I thought consensus was pretty good that we *do* want to have a single,
> standardized interface for package configuration wherever possible.
> With the exception of essential packages that can't depend on debconf

That makes sense. That might be where the confusion lay.

> (but can use it if installed), all interactively-configured packages
> that I've installed of late have been fully debconf-based.  I think
> we're getting close to the point where policy can be changed to make
> debconf a 'must' without rendering packages instantly buggy.

So that's on the cards. Good to hear.


NEW! The Debian Enterprise Project: http://debian-enterprise.org/
Homepage: http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~zenaan/
PGP Key: http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~zenaan/zen.asc
Please respect this email's confidentiality as sensibly warranted.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: