On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 05:17:35PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 10:48:31AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 10:30:18AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > > > > What's again using debconf with two low-priority questions: > > > (1) Use debconf to configure this package [yes] > > > The first of these questions is *always* *always* *always* a bug. There > > is no reason to ask if debconf should be used, instead of just asking > > the questions about the config settings debconf will change, except when > > the debconf handling does not correctly preserve local modifications, > > and asking with debconf does not excuse this behavior. > > The first question is often asked in order to allow users who don't want > to use the Debconf configuration to avoid having to sit through reams of > configuration which will only be ignored anyway. That strikes me as > being useful. Except that in this case, the single question doubles the amount of questions asked. -- Wouter Verhelst Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org "Stop breathing down my neck." "My breathing is merely a simulation." "So is my neck, stop it anyway!" -- Voyager's EMH versus the Prometheus' EMH, stardate 51462.
Description: Digital signature