reopen 206524 severity 206524 wishlist retitle 206524 xfree86: don't transition files missing the debconf markers reassign 206524 xfree86 thanks On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 12:40:52AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > I understand, however I think this is still a bug since to avoid that > debconf messes with a file, removing debconf marks is one way to do > and this worked fine until this release. It would be nice that the > transition notices the absence of debconf marks like debconf does > (even if this method is now deprecated, there is no clear notice of > this, not everybody uses apt-listchanges). People who don't use apt-listchanges get what they deserve. :) Anyway, you make a good point and it should be easy enough to support this. (Note to self: fix both xserver-common.preinst.in and xserver-xfree86.preinst.in.) > However, it is ok for me to let this bug closed, I did not notice this > was done on purpose (and documented). Well, it's still a bit surprising, I guess. The idea behind this transition is to stop surprising the people who have refused to read the part that says "IF YOU EDIT THIS FILE, DO SO OUTSIDE THE DEBCONF REGION OR REMOVE THE DEBCONF MARKERS". It is, I suppose, a little perverse that I am now "punishing" the people who *did* read that stuff by migrating their files when they thought they did what they needed to to avoid it. Even though it's documented, and even though they failed to answer the debconf question correctly. Hmm. I should have had my config scripts force the answer to the "manage" questions to "false" if the debconf markers had gone missing. But that never occurred to me, and I don't think anyone ever suggested it. Sigh. Oh well, Joey Hess is right; it's better not to ask questions about "managing files with debconf" at all. Thanks for your report. -- G. Branden Robinson | One doesn't have a sense of humor. Debian GNU/Linux | It has you. branden@debian.org | -- Larry Gelbart http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpP6KqLDxQGf.pgp
Description: PGP signature