Re: Clarification: Eliminate nagging at installation time?
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> [1 <text/plain; us-ascii (7bit)>]
> On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 08:03:19AM +0000, Norbert Nemec wrote:
> > IMO, packages should under no circumstances complain
> > about anything if it is avoidable at all.
>
> As an example, what would happen to netbase's postinst questions and
> comments? It currently warns about stopping the portmapper (and thus
> possibly doing horrible things to any rpc processes, such as NFS), it
> asks if you want to add some IPv6 entries to /etc/hostsc (which could
> possibly do bad things to programs not coping with ipv6 addressing, but
> doesn't seem to), and if you want ipfwadm to make calls to ipchains under
> kernel 2.2 or not.
This is an untypical example, and Norbert already said "if it is
avoidable at all". Most packages ask irrelevant stuff like which CVS
repository to use or which default URL.
But IMHO we should wait a bit for the progress of the configuration
backend projects before we change the policy.
Falk
Reply to: