On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 10:25:04AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, 07 Feb 2005, Agustin Martin wrote:
> > Rather than a debconf option I would say some way to allow those > > settings be preserved, but I agree that something must be done. > > Having a debconf query at package install will add an extra question > > (really two) for a probably minor audience, but will annoy more > > people unless we give that question a low priority. > > I was actually thinking of just another option in the default > dictionary prompting phase to the effect of "don't change my > settings". I also thought about that, but I saw some preliminary drawbacks. On the one side the debconf prompting is only done in some rare cases, for most cases a reasonable guess can be done after the value of the LANG variable, and that will fortunately result in no debconf prompt at all. On the other hand it will imply more interaction with debconf, changing database values and so on. Not a big problem, we already do some black magic with that, but I expect it to be harder to debug, although I actually did not yet tried coding things that way. I have been playing with something somewhat different, e.g., # update-default-ispell [--auto|--manual] to switch between automatic and manual modes, and launch the dict selection menu if appropriate. This is something closer to the update-alternatives manual mode. Another possibility I am considering is prompting from update-default-* before the selection menu instead of using options. Current tests use debconf to store the values for wordlists and ispell dicts, but since it is not a reuse of something introduced at the preconfigure stage of package install (like we currently do with update-default-*), I find that to be a rather clear debconf abuse. I will probably use a file under /usr/lib like update-alternatives does. I am still in the 'test many things' stage, so adding an extra debconf entry is not fully discarded, if I find some way to make it solid enough. > > > All this will require changes in a number of places, so will need > > extensive testing before upload, and much more testing before I try > > to put this in sarge (dictionaries-common is standard because > > standard wamerican depends on it, so it is frozen) > > Yeah... but assuming the testing gets done, there's no reason not to > try for proposed-updates (unless the release team thinks differently) I will try it anyway, > > No problem. [I actually saw it from another bug... wamerican is > actually installed but something has caused it to disappear from the > list of dictionaries that dictionaries-common knows about... but I > haven't tracked that one down enough to know what is going on there.] I will try to take a look at that. Cheers, -- Agustin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
