Re: woody : X install
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 07:38:29PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > PGI already does something similar to what you describe. > > I see; how hard would it be to integrate into the main Debian package? > I guess my main point here is that it's a solvable problem; I don't > think this approach goes against the spirit of Debconf at all. Hard. It's difficult to test-launch the X server before it's been unpacked... -- G. Branden Robinson|The first thing the communists do Debian GNU/Linux |when they take over a country is to [EMAIL PROTECTED] |outlaw cockfighting. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |-- Oklahoma State Senator John Monks pgpBO8sNA1W1h.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: woody : X install
On Wed, 2002-10-23 at 18:01, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 02:52:43PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > Ok, here's the way I see things happening. We use discover and friends > > to populate the debconf database, like you do now in the xserver-xfree86 > > .config script. We only ask the user to confirm at a priority of > > "low". The default for the confirm question is "yes". > > Medium. Things can be autodetected wrongly. "Low" is for things that > can't really be "wrong", just annoying to nitpicky people. Ok, fair enough. > PGI already does something similar to what you describe. I see; how hard would it be to integrate into the main Debian package? I guess my main point here is that it's a solvable problem; I don't think this approach goes against the spirit of Debconf at all. > We long ago solved the looping display manager problem, so it's just as > well to let the display managers fail. They won't tie up the system for > long and they let the display managers start again on a good > configuration even if something is stupid and leaves the > /etc/X11/x-server-unconfigured file around. Ok, right. Yeah, that works well. Cool. We're getting there.
Re: woody : X install
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 07:38:29PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > PGI already does something similar to what you describe. > > I see; how hard would it be to integrate into the main Debian package? > I guess my main point here is that it's a solvable problem; I don't > think this approach goes against the spirit of Debconf at all. Hard. It's difficult to test-launch the X server before it's been unpacked... -- G. Branden Robinson|The first thing the communists do Debian GNU/Linux |when they take over a country is to [EMAIL PROTECTED] |outlaw cockfighting. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |-- Oklahoma State Senator John Monks msg04221/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: woody : X install
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 02:52:43PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > Ok, here's the way I see things happening. We use discover and friends > to populate the debconf database, like you do now in the xserver-xfree86 > .config script. We only ask the user to confirm at a priority of > "low". The default for the confirm question is "yes". Medium. Things can be autodetected wrongly. "Low" is for things that can't really be "wrong", just annoying to nitpicky people. > After XFree86 is installed, if it succeeds (as we should strive to make > sure it does for as many possible setups as we can), then we're all > good. > Now, if it fails, we touch a file like > /etc/X11/x-server-autoconfiguration-failed, and use curses to prompt the > user with something like: > "The graphics system (X server) failed to start: > [ include contents of tail -8 /var/log/XFree86.0.log ] > Do you want to rerun the configuration wizard?" PGI already does something similar to what you describe. I've been asked to add a "Test X server configuration" button to the X server configlet. This could be added to the postinst script, too: false by default and only asked at medium priority. Or we could just let installers fool with that. Guess I'll be needing to add "back" support to the X server config script while I'm at it. Sigh, sigh. > If they say yes, we exec "dpkg-reconfigure --plow --priority=low > xserver-xfree86". After this, we try to start X again. If it succeeds, > we rm /etc/X11/x-server-autoconfiguration-failed, and again we're good. > If it fails, then we just give up, inform the user appropriately, and > touch a file like /etc/X11/x-server-unconfigured. Login managers like > GDM can look for this file, and refuse to start if it exists. We long ago solved the looping display manager problem, so it's just as well to let the display managers fail. They won't tie up the system for long and they let the display managers start again on a good configuration even if something is stupid and leaves the /etc/X11/x-server-unconfigured file around. -- G. Branden Robinson|A committee is a life form with six Debian GNU/Linux |or more legs and no brain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Robert Heinlein http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | pgpAuk3Q5W2sc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: woody : X install
On Wed, 2002-10-23 at 18:01, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 02:52:43PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > Ok, here's the way I see things happening. We use discover and friends > > to populate the debconf database, like you do now in the xserver-xfree86 > > .config script. We only ask the user to confirm at a priority of > > "low". The default for the confirm question is "yes". > > Medium. Things can be autodetected wrongly. "Low" is for things that > can't really be "wrong", just annoying to nitpicky people. Ok, fair enough. > PGI already does something similar to what you describe. I see; how hard would it be to integrate into the main Debian package? I guess my main point here is that it's a solvable problem; I don't think this approach goes against the spirit of Debconf at all. > We long ago solved the looping display manager problem, so it's just as > well to let the display managers fail. They won't tie up the system for > long and they let the display managers start again on a good > configuration even if something is stupid and leaves the > /etc/X11/x-server-unconfigured file around. Ok, right. Yeah, that works well. Cool. We're getting there. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: woody : X install
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 02:52:43PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > Ok, here's the way I see things happening. We use discover and friends > to populate the debconf database, like you do now in the xserver-xfree86 > .config script. We only ask the user to confirm at a priority of > "low". The default for the confirm question is "yes". Medium. Things can be autodetected wrongly. "Low" is for things that can't really be "wrong", just annoying to nitpicky people. > After XFree86 is installed, if it succeeds (as we should strive to make > sure it does for as many possible setups as we can), then we're all > good. > Now, if it fails, we touch a file like > /etc/X11/x-server-autoconfiguration-failed, and use curses to prompt the > user with something like: > "The graphics system (X server) failed to start: > [ include contents of tail -8 /var/log/XFree86.0.log ] > Do you want to rerun the configuration wizard?" PGI already does something similar to what you describe. I've been asked to add a "Test X server configuration" button to the X server configlet. This could be added to the postinst script, too: false by default and only asked at medium priority. Or we could just let installers fool with that. Guess I'll be needing to add "back" support to the X server config script while I'm at it. Sigh, sigh. > If they say yes, we exec "dpkg-reconfigure --plow --priority=low > xserver-xfree86". After this, we try to start X again. If it succeeds, > we rm /etc/X11/x-server-autoconfiguration-failed, and again we're good. > If it fails, then we just give up, inform the user appropriately, and > touch a file like /etc/X11/x-server-unconfigured. Login managers like > GDM can look for this file, and refuse to start if it exists. We long ago solved the looping display manager problem, so it's just as well to let the display managers fail. They won't tie up the system for long and they let the display managers start again on a good configuration even if something is stupid and leaves the /etc/X11/x-server-unconfigured file around. -- G. Branden Robinson|A committee is a life form with six Debian GNU/Linux |or more legs and no brain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Robert Heinlein http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | msg04216/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: woody : X install
On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 18:21, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:21:00PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > Speaking with my Debian Desktop hat on, I would prefer it if you took > > the approach of just trying what the autodetection tools said, and only > > if that fails, offer the user a choice of options. > > The Debconf spec won't let me do that. If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", I > need to grind to a halt and wait for the user to confirm, e.g., the > usage of the "XFree86" server and "tdfx" driver for his Voodoo3 3000 > card. I am not worried about what happens when the debconf priority is "low". The Debian Desktop will for sure default to at least "high". > > If the autodetection tools give incorrect information, then that's a > > bug in those tools we should fix. If the X server doesn't get enough > > information from the autodetection tools, then we should fix that. > > I agree, but there is simply no way to completely eliminate the > interactivity, *even if* the autodetection tools work perfectly, and > still play the Debconf game. Ok, here's the way I see things happening. We use discover and friends to populate the debconf database, like you do now in the xserver-xfree86 .config script. We only ask the user to confirm at a priority of "low". The default for the confirm question is "yes". After XFree86 is installed, if it succeeds (as we should strive to make sure it does for as many possible setups as we can), then we're all good. Now, if it fails, we touch a file like /etc/X11/x-server-autoconfiguration-failed, and use curses to prompt the user with something like: "The graphics system (X server) failed to start: [ include contents of tail -8 /var/log/XFree86.0.log ] Do you want to rerun the configuration wizard?" If they say yes, we exec "dpkg-reconfigure --plow --priority=low xserver-xfree86". After this, we try to start X again. If it succeeds, we rm /etc/X11/x-server-autoconfiguration-failed, and again we're good. If it fails, then we just give up, inform the user appropriately, and touch a file like /etc/X11/x-server-unconfigured. Login managers like GDM can look for this file, and refuse to start if it exists. If they say no to the "run configuration wizard" question, we just touch that x-server-unconfigured file. > If we want to discuss this more we should move over to debian-x. Ok, I'll subscribe.
Re: woody : X install
On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 18:21, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:21:00PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > Speaking with my Debian Desktop hat on, I would prefer it if you took > > the approach of just trying what the autodetection tools said, and only > > if that fails, offer the user a choice of options. > > The Debconf spec won't let me do that. If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", I > need to grind to a halt and wait for the user to confirm, e.g., the > usage of the "XFree86" server and "tdfx" driver for his Voodoo3 3000 > card. I am not worried about what happens when the debconf priority is "low". The Debian Desktop will for sure default to at least "high". > > If the autodetection tools give incorrect information, then that's a > > bug in those tools we should fix. If the X server doesn't get enough > > information from the autodetection tools, then we should fix that. > > I agree, but there is simply no way to completely eliminate the > interactivity, *even if* the autodetection tools work perfectly, and > still play the Debconf game. Ok, here's the way I see things happening. We use discover and friends to populate the debconf database, like you do now in the xserver-xfree86 .config script. We only ask the user to confirm at a priority of "low". The default for the confirm question is "yes". After XFree86 is installed, if it succeeds (as we should strive to make sure it does for as many possible setups as we can), then we're all good. Now, if it fails, we touch a file like /etc/X11/x-server-autoconfiguration-failed, and use curses to prompt the user with something like: "The graphics system (X server) failed to start: [ include contents of tail -8 /var/log/XFree86.0.log ] Do you want to rerun the configuration wizard?" If they say yes, we exec "dpkg-reconfigure --plow --priority=low xserver-xfree86". After this, we try to start X again. If it succeeds, we rm /etc/X11/x-server-autoconfiguration-failed, and again we're good. If it fails, then we just give up, inform the user appropriately, and touch a file like /etc/X11/x-server-unconfigured. Login managers like GDM can look for this file, and refuse to start if it exists. If they say no to the "run configuration wizard" question, we just touch that x-server-unconfigured file. > If we want to discuss this more we should move over to debian-x. Ok, I'll subscribe. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: woody : X install
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:32:43PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", then this is exactly what the user is asking > for. They want to see everything, even questions that have an appropriate > default. [...] > Anyone who is bewildered by technical questions should have their priority > set to high. Nearly everything should be non-interactive at that point, > unless something goes wrong. You're preaching to the choir. I was addressing Colin Walters's suggestion. -- G. Branden Robinson| When I die I want to go peacefully Debian GNU/Linux | in my sleep like my ol' Grand [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Dad...not screaming in terror like http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | his passengers. pgpvauUGTcnmO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: woody : X install
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:32:43PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", then this is exactly what the user is asking > for. They want to see everything, even questions that have an appropriate > default. [...] > Anyone who is bewildered by technical questions should have their priority > set to high. Nearly everything should be non-interactive at that point, > unless something goes wrong. You're preaching to the choir. I was addressing Colin Walters's suggestion. -- G. Branden Robinson| When I die I want to go peacefully Debian GNU/Linux | in my sleep like my ol' Grand [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Dad...not screaming in terror like http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | his passengers. msg04268/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: woody : X install
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:21:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:21:00PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > Speaking with my Debian Desktop hat on, I would prefer it if you took > > the approach of just trying what the autodetection tools said, and only > > if that fails, offer the user a choice of options. > > The Debconf spec won't let me do that. If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", I > need to grind to a halt and wait for the user to confirm, e.g., the usage > of the "XFree86" server and "tdfx" driver for his Voodoo3 3000 card. If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", then this is exactly what the user is asking for. They want to see everything, even questions that have an appropriate default. > > If the autodetection tools give incorrect information, then that's a bug > > in those tools we should fix. If the X server doesn't get enough > > information from the autodetection tools, then we should fix that. > > I agree, but there is simply no way to completely eliminate the > interactivity, *even if* the autodetection tools work perfectly, and still > play the Debconf game. Anyone who is bewildered by technical questions should have their priority set to high. Nearly everything should be non-interactive at that point, unless something goes wrong. -- - mdz
Re: woody : X install
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:21:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:21:00PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > Speaking with my Debian Desktop hat on, I would prefer it if you took > > the approach of just trying what the autodetection tools said, and only > > if that fails, offer the user a choice of options. > > The Debconf spec won't let me do that. If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", I > need to grind to a halt and wait for the user to confirm, e.g., the usage > of the "XFree86" server and "tdfx" driver for his Voodoo3 3000 card. If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", then this is exactly what the user is asking for. They want to see everything, even questions that have an appropriate default. > > If the autodetection tools give incorrect information, then that's a bug > > in those tools we should fix. If the X server doesn't get enough > > information from the autodetection tools, then we should fix that. > > I agree, but there is simply no way to completely eliminate the > interactivity, *even if* the autodetection tools work perfectly, and still > play the Debconf game. Anyone who is bewildered by technical questions should have their priority set to high. Nearly everything should be non-interactive at that point, unless something goes wrong. -- - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: woody : X install
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:21:00PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 13:54, Branden Robinson wrote: > > I'll be rewriting it from scratch over the coming months and trying to > > work out a strategy for letting the user select between up to three > > sources of information: > > > > 1) what the autodetection tools (if any) say > > 2) what the debconf database already says (if anything) > > 3) what the X server config file already says (if anything) > > Speaking with my Debian Desktop hat on, I would prefer it if you took > the approach of just trying what the autodetection tools said, and only > if that fails, offer the user a choice of options. The Debconf spec won't let me do that. If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", I need to grind to a halt and wait for the user to confirm, e.g., the usage of the "XFree86" server and "tdfx" driver for his Voodoo3 3000 card. > If the autodetection tools give incorrect information, then that's a > bug in those tools we should fix. If the X server doesn't get enough > information from the autodetection tools, then we should fix that. I agree, but there is simply no way to completely eliminate the interactivity, *even if* the autodetection tools work perfectly, and still play the Debconf game. If we want to discuss this more we should move over to debian-x. -- G. Branden Robinson| It's not a matter of alienating Debian GNU/Linux | authors. They have every right to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | license their software however we http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | like. -- Craig Sanders pgpFcKdlRZnEt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: woody : X install
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:21:00PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 13:54, Branden Robinson wrote: > > I'll be rewriting it from scratch over the coming months and trying to > > work out a strategy for letting the user select between up to three > > sources of information: > > > > 1) what the autodetection tools (if any) say > > 2) what the debconf database already says (if anything) > > 3) what the X server config file already says (if anything) > > Speaking with my Debian Desktop hat on, I would prefer it if you took > the approach of just trying what the autodetection tools said, and only > if that fails, offer the user a choice of options. The Debconf spec won't let me do that. If DEBIAN_PRIORITY is "low", I need to grind to a halt and wait for the user to confirm, e.g., the usage of the "XFree86" server and "tdfx" driver for his Voodoo3 3000 card. > If the autodetection tools give incorrect information, then that's a > bug in those tools we should fix. If the X server doesn't get enough > information from the autodetection tools, then we should fix that. I agree, but there is simply no way to completely eliminate the interactivity, *even if* the autodetection tools work perfectly, and still play the Debconf game. If we want to discuss this more we should move over to debian-x. -- G. Branden Robinson| It's not a matter of alienating Debian GNU/Linux | authors. They have every right to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | license their software however we http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | like. -- Craig Sanders msg04248/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
