On Sat, Dec 05 2009, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> What speaks against it? Its basically a mini tool (Installed-Size: 260) > and not making it essential leads to the mentioned situations. I am afraid I do not follow -- what situations are improved by making ucf essential? > The only bad thing is, that it depends on a tool which is not essential > (debconf) and seems not to be able to render questions without debconf. Actually, the ask questions without debconf functionality was ripped out just a couple of months ago, since not using debconf is now a policy violation. > Or should we simply not care about packages modifying files (via > external tools) and not reverting those changes when beeing removed? If you are going to remove the file, why bother reverting any changes? manoj -- It is a poor judge who cannot award a prize. Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org