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

Re: Bug#224742: Related to this issue...

Scripsit Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 05:12:19PM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:

> > Again, I think the way it actually works should be changed, and I think
> > it's useful for this *technical* considerations of mine to be held in
> > the records.

> There aren't any technical considerations: "   test-foo yes" has all
> the same properties as would "test-foo",

It *is* a technical consideration that it is hard to explain to users
what the semantically meaningless "yes" is there for and why they have
to put it. It makes Debian seem silly that software developed for it
insists on having meaningless bits floating around in its
configuration files.

It seems that you want Enrico to write in his documentation something
along the lines of "you have to put a "yes" there; it means absolutely
nothing, but the ifupdown author insists that is there and repeatedly
refused to explain *why* he insists so". Why is that so?

Henning Makholm           "Larry wants to replicate all the time ... ah, no,
                   all I meant was that he likes to have a bang everywhere."

Reply to: