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

Re: [2002-04-30] Release Status Update



[ I'm coming in from the sideline here; I hope I don't step on anybody's
toes...]

On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 07:00:36PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 02:44:26PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Colin Watson wrote:
> > > Those that have been filed have been closed out of hand or tagged
> > > wontfix, e.g. #141838 ...
> > I suppose it just hits upgrades from older versions of woody.
> > We also forgot to turn --force-overwrite on by default in dpkg this time
> > around.
> 
> Perhaps we should upload a new base-config that does 'echo force-overwrite
> >>/etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg' ?
> 
> Something like:
> 
> if [ -e /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg ] && ! grep -q force-overwrite /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg
> then
> 	oldmd5=`md5sum < /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg | cut -d" " -f1`
> 	echo 'force-overwrite' >>/etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg
> 	newmd5=`md5sum < /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg | cut -d" " -f1`
> 	(echo "%s, /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg $oldmd5, /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg $newmd5,"
> 	 echo "w"
> 	 echo "q") | ed - /var/lib/dpkg/status
> fi
> 
> during the base configuration would probably work effectively. All those
> commands are present in base.

As a debian user (and maintainer-wannabe), I would not like this
solution.

If I install a package, I would like to be warned if the package is
going to overwrite a file from another package, and have the opportunity
*not* to do so (it might be a file I consider important). At least I
would like this to be the default.

I guess it would be OK (but not desireable) to use this for the initial
install, because we would be talking about a relatively known set of
packages. 

Once control is handed back to the administrator, I belive the default
should be not to overwrite.

Just my 2p
-- 
Karl E. Jørgensen
karl@jorgensen.com
www.karl.jorgensen.com
==== Today's fortune:
Why use Windows, since there is a door?
(By fachat@galileo.rhein-neckar.de, Andre Fachat)

Attachment: pgpujmeI4g7gr.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: