Re: new debian user questions
Hi,
Daniel Martin pointed out exactly what I wanted to say, but in better
words. Thanks.
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Daniel Martin wrote:
> Having read the original post, I was under the impression that this would
> be a desirable state, not necessarily an expression of the current state.
On 23 Oct 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Daniel> So... Does diety attempt to integrate the configuration tools
> Daniel> that do come with some of the Debian packages? And what about
> Daniel> the question earlier of having the configuration menus that
> Daniel> appear during initial setup available without booting from the
> Daniel> install CD/floppy?
>
> Well, if there were a standard interface, Deity might try;
> but, as it stands, most packages arrange to invoke the configuration
> utility/script out of the postconfig script anyway; so the config
> script is run by dpkg with no assistace from Deity.
This is clear. It should also be able to do a basic setup without 'dialog'
installed. But you know, it's not always running without problems after
installing. When the postconfig went wrong, there should be a standard
place/method to rerun the config, which should be as clear as installing.
I did an install of debian on a laptop of a friend this week. He was not
the person to struggle with the system, he just wanted X, octave,
lyx/latex and a running pcmcia-network card. I can tell you, I got a red
head configuring the basics. Once because of the work, and also because I
felt somewhat ashamed to have to configure so many things with vi - for a
basic installation. I know where to look, no problem. But it takes time
anyway. We all had problems installing the basic system, isn't it? Trying
to configure a kernel on a base system to access the cd-rom. To have X
running. To be able to deliver mail locally AND outbound. To have colors
in xterm, to have ls displaying in color and with slashes after a
directory. To let xdm look better. I did not even know there was an
xbase-configure (I did try xbaseconfig, which would be the standard name,
or not?).
> Remember, even when Deity is deployed, dpkg shall remain the
> underlying mechanism; and it will alsways be legal to bypass Deity
> and use raw dpkg to install packages. We can't, then, do things in a
> fashion that the configs only work when the installation is run by
> Deity.
I would like to invoke dpkg --setup on a package to invoke the script, or
let dselect do that. and maybe dpkg --display-setup to see what is done.
> Any enhancements to configuring packages, thus, has to be
> implemented by dpkg. Does this make sense?
Yes it does. It is only a calling standard. A definition. It would be
simple to follow it for package maintainers, and easy to implement in
dselect/diety.
Please don't take me too literal, I learned english too late to be able to
express everything the right way.
Gruss
--
Lukas Eppler (godot)
http://www.fear.ch
telnet://soil.fear.ch:3333
talk:godot@moon.fear.ch
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org . Trouble?
e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: