tags 397214 -patch
thanks
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:16:03 + (GMT)
Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
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
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:37:38 + (GMT)
Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
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
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
# 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.
But in the config script
Package: uswsusp
Version: 0.3~cvs20060928-2
Followup-For: Bug #397214
I also confirm this bug.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (700, 'testing'), (600, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel:
For more detail, what actually happens is that the config file is
regenerated on upgrade from the original debconf questions. However,
this a. discards any local changes not made through debconf (should we
allow these? if not the warning in the conf file should be bigger!) and
b. several of the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
tags 397214 patch
thanks
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Matthew Johnson wrote:
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.
I've attached a patch which does
On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 12:42:40 +0100
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vagrant Cascadian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: uswsusp
Version: 0.3~cvs20060928-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 10.7.3
i had locally modified my /etc/uswsusp.conf to use a different resume
Tim Dijkstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for looking in to this Frank, but I think you're mistaking. What
it does (well, is supposed to do) is make a debconf list of valid swap
partitions, with the biggest as the default. Then it parses the config
file and set values it found as the
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:46:44 +0100
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was just bug-hunting. I don't know what the reason was why the device
was unavailable, but I think there may be valid setups where this is the
case.
I just read in another report by Vagrant that he was trying to use
Tim Dijkstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am inclined however to just add the value from the configuration file to the
list. If people want to change the configuration file by hand, they should be
allowed to shoot themselves it the foot. The worst that can happen is that
the partition doesn't
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 05:22:57PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:46:44 +0100
Frank K?ster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was just bug-hunting. I don't know what the reason was why the device
was unavailable, but I think there may be valid setups where this is the
case.
Vagrant Cascadian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: uswsusp
Version: 0.3~cvs20060928-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 10.7.3
i had locally modified my /etc/uswsusp.conf to use a different resume
device, but on a recent upgrade, it over-wrote my configuration file
changes without
Package: uswsusp
Version: 0.3~cvs20060928-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 10.7.3
i had locally modified my /etc/uswsusp.conf to use a different resume
device, but on a recent upgrade, it over-wrote my configuration file
changes without asking.
this also results in my resume partition
14 matches
Mail list logo
