Re: Bug#238193: use debconf to manage permissions of ls-r not high-priority question
Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> :-! Use debconf to manage permissions of ls-R files?
>> That's completely unacceptable to present as a high priority question
>> to a new user. IT has an obvious default (yes) and tetex-bin is a
>> dependency of enough stuff that it should not ask questions during a
>> normal install.
> As usual, this question only exists because it masks a more insidious
> bug: there would be no reason to ask at all if the debconf support were
> actually policy-compliant in the handling of users' local configuration.
I am aware that we are not very good at this (but improving). But in
this particular case, could you please elaborate a little? Not only would we
have to safely figure out the "user's local configuration" - in this
case whether he manually set the permissions of the ls-R files. The
problem is also that upstream changed ls-R handling a couple of times.
On a fresh install (if the files simply don't exist) we needn't ask
anything, that's right. But if we do find something, I currently see no
> This should, by all rights, be a "serious" bug, but I don't know whether
> it's realistic to consider this RC for sarge now that it's been ignored
> for so long.
The problem is that in fact we don't know whether sarge will be released
within weeks or months. Currently we are dividing our efforts between
the current packages with rather outdated tetex-2.0.2 and tetex-3.0
which will be released within the next weeks (in this case really 2-6
weeks, I'm sure).
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie