Steve Langasek wrote: > ... your argument against the use of debconf is that questions at low > priority will sometimes be asked? Um, anybody who runs debconf at low > priority gets exactly what they ask for. Trying to create a separate > priority with the explicit intention that the questions will *never* be > asked would inappropriately overload debconf. My argument is that debconf priority low is defined to be used in user interaction. If, in the opinion of the maintainer, there is a resonable default, policy instructs him hat the interaction should be avoided. If CDDs want to use debconf in these cases, priority low is not appropriate. (For your reference of the NTP howto: The howto & faq on ntp.org contains dead links in the server selection section. My guess that it was written before there was pool.ntp.org.) Kind regards Thomas P.S.: Sorry for sending this privately only at first. -- Thomas Viehmann, <http://beamnet.de/tv/>
Attachment:
pgpOPA04_lu3d.pgp
Description: PGP signature