On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 01:53:06PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > 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.
Erm, yes, but isn't that "/etc" ?
Certainly we're not planning on replacing /etc/exim/exim.conf with various
debconf scripts. I can't imagine that we want to drop things like "webmin"
either, which offers an alternative interface for package configuration.
Debconf is, at most, a single, standardized interface for interaction
to ensure that packages are minimally configured for operation at install.
Personally, I'm leaning towards thinking that if you have some special
configuration for a package you want people to be able to use you should
do something like:
* dump new configuration in /etc
* unpack package
* configure package
- package notices it's already been setup,
doesn't do debconf
* done!
In particular, that doesn't require the package to change every time some
random derived distribution wants to configure it in some particular way.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can.
http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
Attachment:
pgpyiTPJETff6.pgp
Description: PGP signature