Bug#626599: Use --no-triggers by default and let dpkg find out the configuration order
On Fri, 13 May 2011, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> I personally use them for quiet a while now in this combination with no
> issues*, but the differences is barely noticeable - also thanks to the
> need for DPkg::TriggersPending=true (needed to "fix" dpkg "bug" #526774)
I have put that bug in my TODO list, I'll try to look into it.
> and - to quote apt.conf manpage - "also it breaks the progress reporting so
> all frontends will currently stay around half (or more) of the time in the
> 100% state while it actually configures all packages.".
This should be fixable, no? dpkg reports what it does via --status-fd and
APT knows how many packages there are to configure... (even if it doesn't
configure them one by one)
> Further more it breaks applications listening on the hooks (apt-listbugs comes
> to mind) as most of they act on scheduled 'Conf' messages -- which doesn't
> exist if APT doesn't plan them obviously. Could be fixed maybe with looking at
> 'Inst', but i am not sure why they are looking for 'Conf' in the first place…
What hook is that ? Or is that simply analyzing the output of the upgrade plan ?
> Note through that triggers like man-db and soon-to-be bash-completion are run
> all the time as literally every package ships a manpage (or at least should)
> and at least quiet a few a binary in /usr/bin and alike. Maybe the deployment
> of triggers which doesn't put the activating package(s) into trigger-awaiting
> would be useful for those as they are non-mission-critical…
Yes, I should implement this as well.
> P.S.: Where does this discussion started off? Pointers anyone?
It's an old thread: http://lists.debian.org/4CCB1055.5020601@cfl.rr.com
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)
Reply to: