On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
For more detail, what actually happens is that the config file is
regenerated on upgrade from the original debconf questions.
This is not true. It is regenerated from what is in the config file
and any new answers. If you read the code carefully you see that it
fills all the question with the values from the file. (except for
splash, which is the real bug)
The postinst that I have (0.3~cvs20060928-2) does:
# If we didn't got a value, we want the hardcoded default,
# so del
if [ -z "$VAL" ]; then SEDCMD="$SEDCMD -e '/$PATRN/ d'"
which means that if $VAL is not set in the debconf answers that line
will be removed from the config file.
b. several of the questions are not asked by debconf because of their
priority. It's not immediately obvious how these should be configured
since dpkg-reconfigure still doesn't ask them due to their debconf
priority (in particular splash).
The priority has nothing to do with it, the splash question is not asked at
all. This is because splash was not supported yet. The current
splash only works with the bootsplash kernel patch, which isn't applied to the
debian kernel.
I added the splash question because I've written a userspace splash library
which can also be linked to uswsusp, but it isn't in debian yet.
I am using the stock debian kernel from etch with splashy (a user-space
splash program) which is in unstable with version number 0.1.8.1-3.1
It's not clear that the automatic generation should happen more than
once; I think it should happen only if the config file doesn't exist.
No. That way people can't use dpkg-reconfigure. Using dpkg-reconfigure is
convenient because that will also regenerate the initramfs and the encryption
keys if you asked for it.
However, it should either not overwrite changes (even if you don't think
there is a suitable splash system without recompiling the kernel, I
think it ought to be supported) or should be clearer in the config file
that an upgrade will overwrite and provide _all_ the questions in
debconf.
To summarize, you bug is a different one. It sneaked in because splash was
not supposed to be supported yet, but apparently you are using a patched
kernel. The solution is very simple and is already in my svn. It will
be included in the next upload.
If it's fixed in the next upload given the rest of my comments, then
fine, but I'd like to see at least more of a warning in the config file,
and the README.Debian should _not_ say "If your not happy with it you
can choose to alter it by hand or..."
Sorry for hassling you on this; I'm really happy with uswsusp in
general, it works really well. The integration with splashy is also cool
(although on resume it fails to init directfb, so I don't get a splash
screen for that; that's presumably splashy's problem, not yours though)
HTH,
Matt
--
Matthew Johnson
http://www.matthew.ath.cx/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
