> I understand and agree with this sentiment, I just don't think that a > critical-priority debconf prompt where space is at a premium is the right > place to take a stand on this. The importance of keeping debconf questions Steve, let me think again about this issue. If I understand correctly, this debconf template is to be shown to *every* user during etch-->lenny upgrades (but not on new installs). Thinking a little bit deeper, I think we should triple check that the whole template wording really has the desired effect: have people think deeper before hitting Enter and understand that they have to *think* about what's being asked. The most important point here is that users are proposed to choose what services to restart. Whether this is because PAM or libc or whatever else is upgraded is not really important for them. The most important is that they have to review the list of services and eventually remove some of them. As an example, I just did this upgrade yesterday and, as I was doing this from a KDE window, I of course had to remove "kdm" from the list. Of course, I'm a bad example because I was aware of that upgrade and thus prepared..:-) So, we really should put the emphasis on "dude, please triple check that list of services and really decide which of them can safely be restarted". This is tricky because it is likely that most of them are just black magic for the random user.....and we cannot explain all of them in one screen (the sentence about display managers is already pretty long). About display managers, I would indeed sugest to remove them from the list (ie not restart them by default) and, if one of them is detected, maybe make an exception to my "Debconf notes are Evil" policy and drop a note explaining that it should be restarted manually ASAP.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature