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

Bug#148993: marked as done (debconf(<!!!!)->cfg)

Your message dated Fri, 1 Jul 2005 23:17:19 -0400
with message-id <20050702031719.GA10292@kitenet.net>
and subject line closing this ug
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 4 Jun 2002 09:09:54 +0000
>From willi@sevenval.de Tue Jun 04 04:09:54 2002
Return-path: <willi@sevenval.de>
Received: from tim.koeln.sevenval.net (torres.office.sevenval.de) [] 
	by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 17FAKA-0006I8-00; Tue, 04 Jun 2002 04:09:54 -0500
Received: (qmail 23366 invoked by uid 1000); 4 Jun 2002 09:09:51 -0000
Message-ID: <20020604090951.23365.qmail@torres.office.sevenval.de>
From: "Wilfried Goesgens" <willi@sevenval.de>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: debconf(<!!!!)->cfg
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 11:09:51 +0200
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Package: base
Version: N/A; reported 2002-06-04
Severity: important

if one opens a config file modified by debconf, 
he can see the statement that this section of the file
is managed by Debconf. But there isn't any hint, which 
script/program to call to modify the values.
in my opinion there should allso be a hint 
'# call /var/lib/dpkg/blablabla to modify it.'
for every possible config-script.
otherwise people will start setting differing options
overriding the debconf values after being set.

-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux torres 2.4.18 #6 Fre Mai 31 17:29:41 CEST 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8

Received: (at 148993-done) by bugs.debian.org; 2 Jul 2005 03:19:35 +0000
>From joey@kitenet.net Fri Jul 01 20:19:35 2005
Return-path: <joey@kitenet.net>
Received: from kitenet.net [] (postfix)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DoYXX-0007Je-00; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 20:19:35 -0700
Received: from dragon.kitenet.net (dpc6682244174.direcpc.com [])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "Joey Hess", Issuer "Joey Hess" (verified OK))
	by kitenet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64ACA17DC8
	for <148993-done@bugs.debian.org>; Sat,  2 Jul 2005 03:19:30 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by dragon.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 773C66E0F8; Fri,  1 Jul 2005 23:17:19 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 23:17:19 -0400
From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: 148993-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: closing this ug
Message-ID: <20050702031719.GA10292@kitenet.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Delivered-To: 148993-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no 

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Closing this bug report, as it's useless here.=20

Please, everyone and anyone, *whenever* you see a config file that
claims to be "managed by debconf" and that you should not edit it, file
a specific bug on that package for=20

  a) making false claims about what debconf does
  b) abusing debconf
  c) violating policy for config files

see shy jo

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)



Reply to: