Re: User output (_not_ prompting) vs prompting in postinst scripts
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 10:13:00AM -0700, misha680 wrote:
> Your idea would have the definite plus of having translations of our message
> - which we would not get with an echo command.
Yes. In addition there are different debconf interfaces. The most
simple one is quite like echo but the more advanced once are nicer to
the user and will be notified better then echo (which can be easily
overseen).
> Sorry for double post :(
No problem.
> > Yes thank you. Probably good to hold off on upload until this issue is
> > resolved.
OK.
> > So, just to check, there is no way to simply tell the user, e.g., via echo
> > somewhere?
This was discussed above.
> > I believe if we put the note in postinst when it is called with the
> > configure command-line parameter this would only happen when configuring
> > the package anyway.
Package installation is a several step process:
0. fetching the packages
1. reading debconf config stuff and asking for user interaction
(after this no interaction should happen)
2. preinst
3. install files (which might last some time)
4. doing postinst of some packages which might also last some time
(if you interupt here and the user comes back from his well
deserved coffee break and can not immediately start working it
is bad)
> > Just personally, I know I would _hate_ to have to be prompted when I'm
> > installing a package, especially when it's just to go to some URL. On the
> > other hand, it _would_ make me pay attention, and otherwise I might just
> > complain to a mailing list :)
It is not about prompting or not. It is about *when* you prompt the user.
The user could be just back from reading the URL you mentioned if prompted
in step 1. above but it sucks if done in step 4.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: