Re: Bug#238193: use debconf to manage permissions of ls-r not high-priority question
Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 10:28:56AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> 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
>> easy way.
> Sorry, I guess I didn't read the debconf question closely enough -- I
> mistook it for one of the other questions that have existed in the past.
> If this is really just asking about managing the *permissions*, I can't
> see that asking the question is an RC bug. I do agree it probably
> doesn't need to be a high priority question.
I'll have a look at it.
> If by "weeks" you mean "less than a month", I think it's safe to say
> that at the current rate of progress, sarge will not be releasable in
> that time period. I'd love to be proven wrong by an *improvement* in
> the current rate of progress.
I count 1, 2, many. And anything below many months is weeks :-)
> But I definitely don't think it will take "many months", as you suggest
> in another message. I definitely think we should be able to get this
> release out before July. Our chances of achieving this are better if
> maintainers restrain themselves from uploading major changes to major
> packages over the next month or so.
I'm quite confident unstable won't see tetex-3 before May. And then it
seems testing won't, either.
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie