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

Re: Debconf doesn't scale well -- suggestion



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 03:06:05PM +0200, Daniel Haude wrote:
> Hello folks,
> 
> I've been running Debian on several machines for several years and have 
> been always happy with it. The only thing that I've almost always had to 
> struggle with is the configuration of the X windows system which I do 
> through debconf. What I don't like about debconf (this is always the case 
> but becomes very obvious with a package like xserver-xfree86 which has a 
> great many options that can be fiddled with) is the one-dimensional 
> approach to the configuration, meaning that you always have to wade 
> through the same collection of questions even if you only want to change 
> one single parameter. There isn't even a chance to go back. Shouldn't it 
> be possible to add an interface which implements the modern approach -- a 
> tabbed collection of configuation panels, one for each section (screen, 
> mouse, keyboard etc) of the configuration?
> 
> I actually find it hard to believe that this isn't being worked on already 
> -- or is it?
> 
> just my .02€
> 
> --Daniel
Hi Daniel,
on the debian-user list (I think) I saw mention of debconf-set-selections 
and debconf-get-selections mentioned. Someone was trying to figure out a 
way to copy a debian setup fully. dpkg --get-selection, -set-selection 
and dselect upgrade are a good start but it doesnt setup /etc or debconf.
This maybe a lead.
- -Kev
PS. IANADD.



> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
> listmaster@lists.debian.org

- -- 

        (__)
        (oo)
  /------\/
 / |    ||
*  /\---/\
   ~~   ~~
...."Have you mooed today?"...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBJnEWAWAAuqdWA9cRAkIPAJ9t39QetZSefOlgQWtY1TWf8wqHMwCfcesN
w/HSFW3Mx8CthLNDTj6pjOE=
=/t4U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: