[Goswin von Brederlow]
> Actually that is forbidden by policy. A package may not change
> another packages conffiles.
Actually, the policy forbids the _maintainer scripts_ of a package to
change another packages conffiles. It does not forbid a script in a
package to change another packages conffi
Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello
>
> I assume that my answer is a bit late as you wrote this in october.
> I have written a package, dysyco that do similar things to what you
> want.
>
> Take a look. I may have misunderstood you.
>
> // Ola
>
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 03:37:27PM -
Hello
I assume that my answer is a bit late as you wrote this in october.
I have written a package, dysyco that do similar things to what you
want.
Take a look. I may have misunderstood you.
// Ola
On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Mark Roach wrote:
> I am working on creating a package
On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 08:04:14AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 01:07:05 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Well, the solution to this problem is to _never_ use debconf to store
> >information. The configuration info should be stored in the
> >configuratio
On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 08:04:14AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> Why is the information given during package installation stored
> persistently in the first place?
it's not stored persistently, that's why it's in /var/cache :)
sean
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 01:07:05 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, the solution to this problem is to _never_ use debconf to store
>information. The configuration info should be stored in the
>configuration files, and the current debconf values should be set
>based on the co
[Jesus Climent]
> The problem being that X using Debconf to store information, Y
> modifying the info and then X getting an upgrade, the info stored by
> X using Debconf might be used again to set the values in the data
> file, which will break the initial purpose of Y.
Well, the solution to this
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 02:33:16PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> This do not scale well, and make it harder to share knowledge across
> several custom debian distros.
>
> > If x and y have configuration utilities xcfg and ycfg then z should
> > insofar as possible use xcfg and ycfg to mak
Am Monday 18 October 2004 02:01 schrieb Enrico Zini:
> One problem with diversion could also be that the original package's
> scripts won't probably edit the diverted conffile, but would probably
> edit the file in the traditional place instead.
Same would be the case for admins and users, and th
On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 10:38:06PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Enrico Zini]
> > One of the suggestions that came out is using dpkg diversions.
> > I remember diversions came out in the past, and I don't remember how
> > come they didn't come out again. Was there something wrong with them?
[Enrico Zini]
> One of the suggestions that came out is using dpkg diversions.
>
> I remember diversions came out in the past, and I don't remember how
> come they didn't come out again. Was there something wrong with them?
I believe they are forbidden or don't work for conffiles. And we need
t
On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 10:32:38PM +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> > I am working on creating a package for UserLinux which will configure
> > several packages with sensible defaults for an authentication server. At
> > the moment, that means samba, slapd, pam and nss, but will also includ
[Thomas Hood]
> Debconf wasn't designed to serve the purpose to which you are trying
> to put it. "Debconf is not a registry."
Actually, debconf was designed for first-time configuration of
packages, and is well suited for the task. Your mantra "debconf is
not a registry" does not apply here.
>
> So, my conclusion is that debconf is not particularly well suited to
> integrating several otherwise-unrelated packages and I am unsure whether
> working around the problem, or helping to improve debconf, or doing it
> some other way entirely is the better approach... thoughts?
Debconf wasn't d
I think that you will find answers in debian-custom list. Adding it to
CC field.
El jue, 14-10-2004 a las 15:37 -0400, Mark Roach escribiÃ:
> I am working on creating a package for UserLinux which will configure
> several packages with sensible defaults for an authentication server. At
> the mom
I am working on creating a package for UserLinux which will configure
several packages with sensible defaults for an authentication server. At
the moment, that means samba, slapd, pam and nss, but will also include
heimdal later on.
My naive question is: is there currently any mechanism for forcin
16 matches
Mail list logo
