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

Re: ntp 4.2.0 in experimental

> > > 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.

Users who don't want to use the debconf configuration use the
noninteractive frontend. I think that most of the "do you want to use
debconf to configure this package" questions are annoying as hell, and
should be removed.

However, I'm on the "use debconf as rarely as possible" side of things.
If there is a usable default config, debconf is not needed. The user
should be clueful enough to fire up an editor and configure stuff if he
wants, I believe.

Reply to: