Tim Dijkstra wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 08:53:02PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote: >> On Sat, 22 Nov 2008, Tim Dijkstra wrote: > >> Where is that setting saved? debconf is not a registry so it must not >> be used for keeping state. > > The fact that you answered the question is remembered by debconf. That > is a feature that is used by ALL packages. You can also be lucky that it > does that or else you would go mad during every upgrade, because you would > have to answer all question of the packages you upgrade all over again. > > If for some reason you blow away your debconf database, that is no > problem. You will just have to answer the question again; That is right > debconf is not a registry and we do not use it as one. >
Hi Peter, hi Tim! I think we are going in circles and talking about different issues. If I understand Peter correctly, and Peter, please correct me if I'm wrong, his concern is not so much about a debconf prompt being shown or not, but the following two issues: a) your primary configuration source should be /etc/uswsusp.conf and *not* the debconf database, i.e. if you run dpkg-reconfigure uswsusp, you should first try to get the configuration data (e.g. for resume device) from uswsusp.conf and only if not present, fall back to the debconf value. I think, this is what Peter tried to say with "debconf is not a registry". b) do not overwrite /etc/uswsusp.conf, if it contains local modifications that would not be preserved by the update. This can be handled e.g. by ucf. If we can agree on the above, imho the way to fix this is clear and there is no need to discuss this on d-d, which would end in a nice flamewar about the usage of debconf anyways, without the actual issue being adressed (I'd be happy to be proven otherwise). Cheers, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
