On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 16:41, Raphael Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> wrote: > DPkg::NoTriggers "true"; > PackageManager::Configure "smart"; > DPkg::ConfigurePending "true"; > DPkg::TriggersPending "true"; > > Since we're at the start of the wheezy cycle, I believe it's a good time > to enable those options. Dear apt maintainers, can you do that please ?
I personally use them for quiet a while now in this combination with no issues*, but the differences is barely noticeable - also thanks to the need for DPkg::TriggersPending=true (needed to "fix" dpkg "bug" #526774) and - to quote apt.conf manpage - "also it breaks the progress reporting so all frontends will currently stay around half (or more) of the time in the 100% state while it actually configures all packages.". Further more it breaks applications listening on the hooks (apt-listbugs comes to mind) as most of they act on scheduled 'Conf' messages -- which doesn't exist if APT doesn't plan them obviously. Could be fixed maybe with looking at 'Inst', but i am not sure why they are looking for 'Conf' in the first place… It was discussed at the UDS today [0], too, where Michael said he would try it with ubuntu's autoupgradetester to see if it would cause regressions in a larger testdeployment then just my little laptop here. Note through that triggers like man-db and soon-to-be bash-completion are run all the time as literally every package ships a manpage (or at least should) and at least quiet a few a binary in /usr/bin and alike. Maybe the deployment of triggers which doesn't put the activating package(s) into trigger-awaiting would be useful for those as they are non-mission-critical… Best regards David Kalnischkies P.S.: Where does this discussion started off? Pointers anyone? [0] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-o-faster-update http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-o/meeting/desktop-o-faster-update/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org