2008/5/16 Darren Kenny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > In the Debian world there is something called debconf to provide a simple UI > (text, curses, GNOME, KDE, etc). to the user. Each dpkg can use this to define > various configuration options, and this then allows that user to be presented > with a UI that meets their needs (depending on debconf's own configuration). > > I think that something like this would be useful for us to have, and while I > think it's not IPS that does the configuration, it would need to be able to > trigger it in the right circumstances.
There are a few issues I have with having a configuration system built-in like Debian does: * Abuse (configuration of the package that actually alters parts of the delivered bits, like removing files, etc.) * Land of a thousand dialogs (I *hate* installing software on a Debian system, don't ask me questions, just use good defaults and install!) * Lower package quality (why make good decisions about the packaging when you can off-load the responsibility on the admin?) If we are really going down the route of having some sort of configuration subsystem, let's ensure that: * Packages cannot depend on it (meaning they *must* pre-define defaults for all options) * The configuration is somehow limited such that it cannot arbitrarily add and remove files to the system (at least unaudited) * That administrators have some easy way to record that configuration so that when re-deploying to other systems they don't have to go through the same process. There's a host of other concerns as well, but I know that many others here are likely more familiar with the pitfalls and advantages thanks to SVR4's "interactive" mode. -- Shawn Walker "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
