Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-09 Thread Agustín Martín Domingo
sean finney wrote: also, the ispell package asks you which language you use by default. it wouldn't be so hard for these packages to ask the same things in debconf, or at least respect your debconf settings, and considering that they ship with stock debian you'd think that they'd have already

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-09 Thread Michael Piefel
Am 9.12.02 um 10:30:05 schrieb Agustín Martín Domingo: That is already done in ispell dicts and wordlists in unstable. [...] Hope you like it Is that the question that is asked again and again for all of the dictionaries I install? No, I don't particularly like it. The questions should only

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-09 Thread Agustín Martín Domingo
Michael Piefel wrote: Is that the question that is asked again and again for all of the dictionaries I install? No, I don't particularly like it. The questions should only be asked once all dictionaries are there; how to do that is beyond me. No, what you mention is the old behavior. If you

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-08 Thread Eduard Bloch
#include hallo.h * Colin Walters [Sat, Dec 07 2002, 08:15:08PM]: But no one has shown any interest in fixing exim. On the other hand I was interested enough in Postfix to write the debconfiscation, and then John Goerzen and LaMont Jones were interested enough to fix and significantly improve

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-08 Thread Andreas Metzler
Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2002-12-07 at 14:23, Bastian Blank wrote: On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 01:44:31PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: And we could fix the exim issue by switching to Postfix as the default MTA... the sollution is not to use other packages, it is fixing

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-08 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 11:06:19AM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2002-12-07 at 14:23, Bastian Blank wrote: On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 01:44:31PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: And we could fix the exim issue by switching to Postfix as the default

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-08 Thread Andreas Metzler
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 11:06:19AM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: [...] The packaging of Exim's new major version (v4) will use debconf, the preliminary test packages already do. Because the configuration file format has changed in a fundamental way,

guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Eduard Bloch
#include hallo.h * Brian May [Sat, Dec 07 2002, 12:40:12PM]: It seems to be set for a pbuilder login operation on the stable version of pbuilder. So do you think debian-image should check the value of DEBIAN_FRONTEND? Sounds like a good idea to me... I think we should document this in

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread sean finney
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 03:56:47PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: I think we should document this in the policy and force maintainers, following this simple rule. When DEBIAN_FRONTEND value is Non-Interactive, no question should interrupt the installation process. Really none. yeah, i REALLY agree

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Colin Walters
On Sat, 2002-12-07 at 10:51, sean finney wrote: also, the ispell package asks you which language you use by default. Ispell is already fixed. And we could fix the exim issue by switching to Postfix as the default MTA...

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Bastian Blank
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 01:44:31PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: And we could fix the exim issue by switching to Postfix as the default MTA... the sollution is not to use other packages, it is fixing the packages. if the maintainers won't do that, we need a policy paragraph to force them.

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
* Bastian Blank | if the maintainers won't do that, we need a policy paragraph to force | them. Would a policy-proposal forcing packages to use debconf for user interaction during installation get support? -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 08:23:16PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: if the maintainers won't do that, we need a policy paragraph to force them. No you need patches to help them. Greetings Bernd -- (OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ( .. ) [EMAIL PROTECTED],linux.de,debian.org}

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Guillem Jover
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 03:56:47PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: I think we should document this in the policy and force maintainers, following this simple rule. When DEBIAN_FRONTEND value is Non-Interactive, ^^^ no question

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread sean finney
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 09:02:56PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: * Bastian Blank | if the maintainers won't do that, we need a policy paragraph to force | them. Would a policy-proposal forcing packages to use debconf for user interaction during installation get support? i think it's a

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread sean finney
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 09:20:11PM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: if the maintainers won't do that, we need a policy paragraph to force them. No you need patches to help them. well if the maintainer is too busy, i could try and figure this out and send a patch. granted i'm not incredibly

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 04:08:24PM -0500, sean finney wrote: On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 09:02:56PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: * Bastian Blank | if the maintainers won't do that, we need a policy paragraph to force | them. Would a policy-proposal forcing packages to use debconf for

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Eduard Bloch
#include hallo.h * Wouter Verhelst [Sat, Dec 07 2002, 11:03:23PM]: Would a policy-proposal forcing packages to use debconf for user interaction during installation get support? i think it's a little heavy handed to do so, Why? In the long run, I think it's the way to go. Although

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread sean finney
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 11:03:23PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: i think it's a little heavy handed to do so, Why? well, i should restate i guess. i agree it's the best thing to do. but i would also image that it suddenly puts a lot more work on the plates of many of the dd's, hence my

Re: guaranteed non-interactive installation and upgrades

2002-12-07 Thread Colin Walters
On Sat, 2002-12-07 at 14:23, Bastian Blank wrote: On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 01:44:31PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: And we could fix the exim issue by switching to Postfix as the default MTA... the sollution is not to use other packages, it is fixing the packages. But no one has shown any