Hi,
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 15:03:51 +0100, Marc Haber
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 10:38:04AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> If a configuration file is removed, the package should be dealing
>> with old configuration files, since some of the tings mentioned
>> require package specific intelligence.
> ucf should at least provide a framework for doing these things, to
Why should it be ucf providing these things, and not, say,
debhelper?
> allow consistent wording of questions asked during upgrade and to
> take complexity from maintainer scrips.
> If you agree, please re-open this bug.
I don't. This seems like creeping featurism to me.
manoj
--
You will think of something funnier than this to add to the fortunes.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
