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

Re: Upgrading the priority of ucf



On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:06:21 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> said: 

> "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson@bigfoot.com> writes:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> It has recently come to my attention that nfs-utils (which is
>> priority standard) cannot depend on ucf, since ucf is of priority
>> optional.
>> 
>> I can only see four solutions for this:
>> 
>> a) Ignore the problem for etch, figure out what do to afterwards.
>> b) Downgrade nfs-utils' priority (but I don't think this is a very
>>    good
>> idea).
>> c) Rip out the ucf dependency (possible, but far from ideal; using
>>    ucf
>> instead of regular conffile handling allowed me to close a few
>> bugs, at least one of them RC).
>> d) Upgrade ucf to priority standard.
>> 
>> I'd personally go with d); would anybody have objections to this?
>> (Cc-ing Manoj as the ucf maintainer, even though I'd believe he
>> reads -devel.)
>> 
>> /* Steinar */

> e) Test for ucf presence and emulate its behaviour if not.

        This is pointless duplication of functionality.  Having every
 standard package with non-conffile configuration files re-invent the
 wheel endlessly seems like bad systems integration design.

        I posit that we do need a standard, well defined, policy
 driven mechanism that packages can depend upon to provide debconf
 based handling of  non-conffile configuration files; if there are
 deficiencies in ucf that should be pointed out, and fixed, or a
 standard mechanism implemented from scratch if ucf  is deemed too
 buggy to fix.

        ucf has a size of 55KB. I think we can easily find more than
 55KB we can yank out of standard post-etch (I have my eye on some
 packages already, and I am sure d-i folks have some ideas too).

        manoj
-- 
If God had intended Man to Smoke, He would have set him on Fire.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C



Reply to: