Bug#72153: tetex-bin should use debconf

[Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp>]

Well, he did not send mail to this list so I cited almost whole 
mail (sorry).

From: Michael Neuffer <neuffer@mail.uni-mainz.de>
Subject: Re: Bug#72153: tetex-bin should use debconf
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 07:21:15 +0200

> Quoting Atsuhito Kohda (kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp):
> > Well, please reply to 72153@bugs.debian.org so that every
> > member of tetex-maint can read ;-)
> > 
> > From: Michael Neuffer <neuffer@mail.uni-mainz.de>
> > Subject: Re: Bug#72153: tetex-bin should use debconf
> > Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:56:40 +0200
> > 
> > > > > tetex-bin should use debconf
> > > > 
> > > > To what purpose?
> > > 
> > > So that unattended installs will be possible for example.
> > > 
> > > During each update of the package it asks to update the file
> > 
> > I might misunderstand your point but do you refer to updating
> > of texmf.cnf?  If so then it can not be handled by debconf.
> 
> Yes, it asks to replace the file with a new one.
>  
> > It is defined as 'conffiles' so dpkg asks if one updates texmf.cnf 
> > or not during update of tetex-bin.
> 
> I should really read the sources of debconf. I thought it was 
> able to handle these cases. This is really a pain in the neck for 
> those people who try to develop unattended installs/updates.

I first simply thought that Michael did not know the mechanism of
conffiles but I think over a bit and come to wonder that it might
be better if we stop to define texmf.cnf as 'conffiles' and treat
its upgrade with debconf.

Is it possible and how do you think about this?

Best Regards,		      2000.9.22

--
 Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
 Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp>
 Department of Math., Tokushima Univ.