Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-19 Thread goswin . brederlow
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > Right. I just do nt see these invariants being very useful. I > > would much rather have a mk-realplayer package that helps me create a > > realplayer-blah.deb; and the invariants are then natural and not > > artificially i

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-19 Thread goswin . brederlow
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Manoj Srivastava wrote: >... > Quite simply: This type of thing can not be handled before unpacking, so > it isn't. Debconf allows package to ask questions in their postinst, > this is just *strongly* discouraged. See the realplayer installer for a > packag

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-18 Thread Manoj Srivastava
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joey> Manoj, you have now several times used loaded words in this discussion: Joey> "hectoring", "threatening". Should I have said ``promising'' bug reports? Joey> Stating that one will file a bug if a feature one depends on, Joey> f

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-18 Thread Anthony Towns
On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 01:40:52AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: > Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > Sorry. The whole idea of my realplayer package is to be a > > lower hassle package; it won't periodically bother you. Since you are > > threatening the next maintainer with bug reports unless they follow

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-18 Thread Joey Hess
Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Joey> If, however, you make it difficult to ensure that a machine tracking > Joey> stable is not running the current version of realplayer, expect me to > Joey> send you bug reports. > > I see. Well, I guess, given this, I am not going to take over > your packag

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-18 Thread Manoj Srivastava
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joey> Well I for one find being able to make sure I am upgraded to the current Joey> version is very useful, especially given the historical buginess of Joey> realplayer. Good point. If a location for the free download can be easily de

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-18 Thread Joey Hess
Joey Hess wrote: > If, however, you make it difficult to ensure that a machine tracking > stable is not running the current version of realplayer, expect me to Er, make that "unstable". -- see shy jo

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-18 Thread Joey Hess
Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Right. I just do nt see these invariants being very useful. I > would much rather have a mk-realplayer package that helps me create a > realplayer-blah.deb; and the invariants are then natural and not > artificially imposed. When that realplayer.deb is installed,

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-17 Thread Manoj Srivastava
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joey> The package is intended to enforce two invarients: Joey> 1) If it is installed, realplayer is installed. Joey> 2) If it is installed and current, the current version of realplayer is Joey>installed. Right. I just do nt see t

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-17 Thread Steve Greenland
On 16-Aug-00, 02:11 (CDT), Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Belive it or not, I know how to safely manage temp files and protect > sensitive information with unix permissions. I know you do, Joey, but my concern is that since the permission violation occurs in the backend, when the backend

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-17 Thread Michael Stone
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 07:19:09AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: > If you don't want to download realplayer right now, why are you > installing the package? E.g., you might have a slow network connection and want to deal with the download later. (So you can finish installing everything else without pau

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-16 Thread Joey Hess
Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Actually, this is a particular irritant. Why does it have to > be done in the postinst? Why can't I have /usr/sbin/inst-realplayer? > So I can download and install at my leaisure, and I do not have to > reinstall realplayer installer to get a new copy? Or have the

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-16 Thread Joey Hess
Brian May wrote: > Just curious, why does realplayer have to do it in the postinst > script? Actually, I was misremembering -- it used to do that but I removed it. > As another example though, look at heimdal-kdc, which needs to ask for > the password, which must be kept as secure as possible. I

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-16 Thread Joey Hess
Brian May wrote: > > "Steve" == Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Steve> Which reminds me, what sort of security is enabled in > Steve> debconf? Can any user read the values from the database, or > Steve> is it limited to root? > > Not sure about this (on my system o

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Manoj Srivastava
>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns writes: Anthony> To clarify a little: I want to be able to answer the Anthony> questions up front, do the install and have it work. If I've This is not somethign anyone can argue with. Anthony> made a mistake (like not put a file where I said I did Anth

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Anthony Towns
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 08:26:50PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: > Anthony Towns wrote: > > Basically, I'd like to be able to insist that I'm *never* asked a question > > as part of a postinst. I'd rather the postinst fail (and I'd rather Apt/Dpkg > > just get on with installing everything else, although

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Brian May
> "Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joey> I read your entire message and could not find any examples Joey> of things that debconf cannot handle correctly, except of Joey> course for conffile change prompting, which it was never Joey> designed to do. I think somet

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Joey Hess
Anthony Towns wrote: > > > X...Y1) Ask to remove /System.map files > > > .X Y2) ask to prepare a boot floppy > > > XXX.Y3) ask which floppy drive to use > > > .XX.?4) do I need to format the floppy? > > > .XXXN5) Insert floppy, hit return

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Anthony Towns
On Mon, Aug 14, 2000 at 11:38:28PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: > > == > > - Question depends on test on fie system > > / Question important (IMHO) > > |/ --- Depends on previous answer > > ||/

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Brian May
> "Steve" == Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Steve> Which reminds me, what sort of security is enabled in Steve> debconf? Can any user read the values from the database, or Steve> is it limited to root? Not sure about this (on my system only root can read /var/lib/debc

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Decklin Foster
Manoj Srivastava writes: > Actually, this is a particular irritant. Why does it have to > be done in the postinst? Why can't I have /usr/sbin/inst-realplayer? > So I can download and install at my leaisure, and I do not have to > reinstall realplayer installer to get a new copy? That's n

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Manoj Srivastava
>>"Decklin" == Decklin Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Decklin> Brian May writes: >> Just curious, why does realplayer have to do it in the postinst >> script? Decklin> Binaries need to be downloaded from Real and we can't redistribute Decklin> them. The user also has to fill out 'persona

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Steve Greenland
On 15-Aug-00, 02:54 (CDT), Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As another example though, look at heimdal-kdc, which needs to ask for > the password, which must be kept as secure as possible. Which reminds me, what sort of security is enabled in debconf? Can any user read the values from the d

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Paul Slootman
On Tue 15 Aug 2000, Decklin Foster wrote: > Brian May writes: > > > Just curious, why does realplayer have to do it in the postinst > > script? > > Binaries need to be downloaded from Real and we can't redistribute > them. The user also has to fill out 'personal information' to be able > to acces

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Decklin Foster
Brian May writes: > Just curious, why does realplayer have to do it in the postinst > script? Binaries need to be downloaded from Real and we can't redistribute them. The user also has to fill out 'personal information' to be able to access the required files. -- There is no TRUTH. There is no

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Brian May
> "Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joey> Quite simply: This type of thing can not be handled before Joey> unpacking, so it isn't. Debconf allows package to ask Joey> questions in their postinst, this is just *strongly* Joey> discouraged. See the realplayer instal

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Joey Hess
Manoj Srivastava wrote: > I do apologize. I was not talkgin about debconf, since I am > not very knowledgeable about it (I have not been keeping up with it, > unfortunately). I do intend a flag day soon to convert all my > packages over. No problem. > Given my ignorance of things

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-15 Thread Manoj Srivastava
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joey> If you have some specific complaints with debconf's design, please post Joey> them, but I'm rather confused about what you're talking about right now, Joey> especially since your whole message was very non-specfic and I often Joey> could

Re: policy changes toward Non-Interactive installation

2000-08-14 Thread Joey Hess
Manoj Srivastava wrote: > If there is an alternate mechanism in place it would be time > to make it policy. But debconf is not required yet, and it may not > fit all potential cases anyway (more on it below). I read your entire message and could not find any examples of things that debconf