Re: The magic of debconf - can I avoid a second run of config?
csmall@enc.com.au (Craig Small) writes:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 06:27:48PM +0100, Johannes Rohr wrote:
> > Lately F-Prot has started offering their own deb, but it is rather
> > broken. Therefore I think that the f-prot-installer package still has a
> > reason to exist.
>
> Have you talked to them about it?
Yes, I did. I mailed to support and they said they forwarded it to the
developers. I had included lintian output with explanations. I don't
know if I have offended them. But their .deb is indeed so broken, you
can't imagine. The debian/copyright file says:
It was downloaded from
<fill in download site here>
There was a debian/rules file in the deb. All the files were installed
into /usr/local/f-prot, the Section: entry was invalid; and many more
issues. It looks like they have just taken their usual binary tarball
and somehow wrapped it into a deb.
I wrote to them some time before or after the release of v 3.12c. Now
with 3.12d they haven't changed anything. They haven't even filled out
or removed the bogus debian/copyright file.
Now, I wonder if it was possible to replace the installer by a proper
f-prot package. But the license file doesn't say anything on
redistribution. So I mailed them for clarification. We'll see if they
respond this time. It would really make life a lot easier for me, not
having to fight with all the debconf voodoo.
> A good responsive upstream can make all the difference.
Well, I guess so.
> > Now, a substantial problem I have is, that, depending on the situation,
> > one or more questions _must_ be asked at _each_ installation.
> must, so make it a high debconf priority, are you sure its must though?
>
> > - If a version of F-Prot is already installed, do you wish to reinstall
> > (i.e. check if there is an update and if yes, download and install it)
> > or should I leave it alone?
> >
> > - Do you wish to use an already downloaded file?
> Combine the two to an option "do nothing", "download and install"
> "install from file"
Yes. Thanks. I completely forgot that we have select, too. But wait:
The "do nothing" option is obviously bogus if there has been no prior
installation of f-prot. (Therefore I had chosen to ask this question
separately and only if a prior installation was found.) Is there a way
to make it non-selectable or hide it away, based on a test?
> > - If so, where do I find it?
> OK
>
> > - If not: Do you wish to proceed with the installation, as it requires a
> > running Internet connection?
> If not what? You mean if they select "download and install"? If so
> they areadty said yes.
I guess, that you're right. My consideration was, that the user should
be given the chance to cancel the installation at some point in case
s/he doesn't have a connection available.
> > Especially with the last three questions, this is an issue: You cannot
> > assume that on each package upgrade the user will give identical answers
> > here.
> >
> > Therefore I have used db_fset f-prot-installer/foobar seen false
> > to ensure that the question is asked at each upgrade.
> I'd use a priority, again I ask is it really neccessary to ask the same
> questions over and over again. consider two scenarios:
> I have some special files or I never want them upgraded for some reason
> I have a DSL connection and want the latest and greatest every time.
But my reality here is kind of a third scenario: I have a relatively
slow ISDN connection. At the initial installation, I would like an
installer package to download the stuff for me. But when I do apt-get
upgrade at a later point, I will probably not pay attention to the
fact, that this "f-prot-installer" thingy also gets upgraded and that
it needs to do another download although I already closed the
connection. I have no idea to which percentage of Debian users either
scenario applies.
Also, if someone chose the "install from file" option and told me that
the files live in /home/joe/Download/foo/bar/, it is certainly unsafe
to assume the same location next time. So I think I _must_ ask the
same question again. Don't you think so?
If I chose a high priority for the questions, this does not safeguard,
that the question is asked again. If it has been seen, it has been
seen and won't be asked again. This is at least what my local tests
revealed. Or am I wrong?
Thanks,
Johannes
Reply to: