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

Re: dh_config_model_upgrade: package upgrade with Config::Model

Neil Williams wrote:
> From an embedded perspective, we certainly don't want every
> configurable package depending on perl at package installation /
> upgrade time - that's why we have cdebconf.

And if that argument had been used when debconf was being written, we
might currently have neither debconf nor cdebconf.

It makes sense to have exactly one general-purpose scripting language in
standard. More are bloat, and with less, rapid prototyping is not
possible. We should not prevent others from using that language for what
it's there for.

It also makes sense to design interfaces to things prototyped in that
language so they can be replaced with a C (or other language) implementation.
Config::Model uses perl for the config file parser/writer in a way that
doesn't allow doing that.

But it does seem likely that packages using it could fall back to
current config file handling if Config::Model were not available
in an embedded system.

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: