Re: ntp 4.2.0 in experimental
Hi, Steve Langasek wrote:
> My argument is that the proposed ntp defaults are not so "reasonable"
> after all, and the debconf question should be retained at high priority --
> with the maintainer scripts fixed to not stomp on local changes.
They're reasonable for quite a few people out there.
The decision to stop using debconf and convert /etc/ntp.conf to a conffile
was Bdale's, by the way. I'm not exactly a debconf fanatic myself, so I
went along with this decision; doing *something* about the myriad of
stomp-on-the-not_a_conffile bugs was necessary.
If you want or need debconf support back, please (a) take it up with the
maintainers (firstname.lastname@example.org), and/or (b) provide a patch to the
"old" maintainer scripts.
Anyway, the other reason there's a ntp-4.2.0 in experimental is that
this is a new upstream version, so a bit of non-debconf-related "it
works", "it sucks" or "it breaks" feedback would be helpful.