[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: allow output from maintainer scripts



(Please don't Cc: me on these mails)

On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 09:07:38AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> >>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
>     Anthony> dpkg already knows this, and it can already be determined
>     Anthony> by looking for "Unpacking ..." or "Setting up ...".
>     >> - current task for this package, as generated by dpkg-log
>     Anthony> Which is exactly what this would be outputting.
> Only the current "dpkg task", not the current "postinst task" or
> ("subtask" to put it another way).

Eh? This entire thread's been about having the postinst output the current
postinst task.

>     >> - this list could highlight more important events based on the
>     >> parameters based to dpkg-log.
>     Anthony> What events here are so important? Why even bother
>     Anthony> displaying the ones that aren't important?
> You seem to imply that a good system is one which generates no output,
> except for what package is being installed, and perhaps what state
> dpkg is in when installing it.

Not even remotely. I'm not sure where you're getting this from at all.

> I think a better system would be to let the user decide how much
> detailed information he wants to see, and to do this the program needs
> to be able to determine the priority of various messages.

Everything you've said previoulsy argues for outputting some information
as to what's going on. I agree completely. Saying when you're starting
services and what not is helpful. We've established that, I think.

What afaict hasn't been established is any reason to prioritise these
messages. Especially when prioritising them introduces extra complexity
either by moderately complicated boiler plate code, or huge numbers
of new dependencies. Who is actually helped by this to make the extra
complexity worthwhile?

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

  ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
                 We believe in: rough consensus and working code.''
                                      -- Dave Clark

Attachment: pgpj73dB6oxnm.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: