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

Bug#71621: Policy on update-alternatives still needed

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes ("Re: Bug#71621: Policy on update-alternatives still needed"):
> > On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 05:25:56PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > >  * retain the manual configuration but simply not use it when
> > >    then user's manual selection is unavailable.
> > 
> > That sounds more promising to me.
> If we do this and retain the existing maintainer scripts then
> everything will be fine *except* that while (say) nvi is unpacked but
> not configured, the system will mysteriously use vim (say) instead.

It's still way better than having no editor.

> Perhaps more thought is actually needed.  I really don't like the idea
> of asking maintainers to switch on $1.  That always goes wrong.  But
> we could ask them to pass their $1 to u-a ?

debhelper postinst snippets tend to check $1 for most operation, I don't
see a big problem in mandating their usage.

Another solution is to define the alternatives in some debhelper
configuration file (debian/package.alternatives) and let debhelper create
the right postrm/postint snippet.

Raphaël Hertzog

Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :

Reply to: