Bas Wijnen wrote: > Debconf actively overwriting values is slightly different from it giving > you a wrong default which it then allows you to set to the desired value > again. The former is overwriting, the latter is just very annoying. > > Then again, with debconf's priority scheme, it may well happen that the > default is used without asking the question, so I suppose there isn't > that much difference. I still don't understand you, and you are still not providing any examples, after having made an assertion that a many packages are misusing debconf as a registry, and pointing to a faulty code search which did not seem to find any. > > > AFAICS, debconf shouldn't actually have a cache at all. > > > > It's hard to imagine that preseeding would work without it. > > Ah yes, I hadn't thought of that. But what is required for preseeding > is to provide a database to debconf for one-time use. Since there is a > cache, it can be used for that, but there is no reason that this > provided database has to persist after the question was asked. It's also needed for the config script to communicate values to the postinst script so they can be used -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature