On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 14:42, Anthony Towns wrote: > 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 Mm - that's what I meant. thanks for the clarification. > 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. Sounding nice. thanks zen -- 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