“DebConf is best known as an annual gathering of Debian developers. But the Debian project likes the name so much that it uses it – give or take a capital ‘C’ – for the system used to configure Debian packages. Just as the conference is central to the social aspects of Debian, so the program is central to the package management system that is one of Debian’s main technical advantages. Debconf gives users as fine a degree of control during configuration as they choose.”
This is a pretty good article. I’ve used Debian GNU/Linux for a few years and I think I know my way around Debian’s configuration system but there are some details in this article that I wasn’t aware of.
One thing that this article doesn’t make obvious, however, is that debconf (and its default settings) work in the background even if you don’t explicitly answer many debconf questions, making the installation of many applications much less painful.
Also distros like Slackware use some scripts that make the system configuration easier but I’ve been told by Slackware users who have tried Debian how Debian has been surprisingly easy to configure and use. Most applications seem to work magically without the usual adjustments that these users have become so used to in simpler distros that leave the configuration of the system and applications to users.
On the other hand, some users seem to be afraid of the many questions that debconf asks them. It makes these users think that Debian is difficult. But all they need to do is run “dpkg-reconfigure debconf” and tell debconf not to ask many questions — this would make Debian much easier for those users who don’t like to anwer many questions. Then debconf would just silently apply the default answers that work for most users.
Ubuntu, for example, has made the default level of debconf questions higher than in Debian proper. This has the effect that many things in Ubuntu seem to “Just Work” out of the box without any user interaction required. But it’s still the same good old debconf working in the background that creates this “Just Works” illusion. 😉
In a moment of extreme mental deficiency someone apparently decided that debconf shouldn’t have decent support for help, but that extra help should be provided as a separate screen BEFORE the questions where you need it. To top it off they made it impossible to return to this help screen when you actually knew what you wanted help with. Madness!
Another extreme stupidity in debconf is that you can’t select the question priority when you start configuring a package. Just because I want to use a certain priority for some kinds of packages doesn’t mean I want the same priority automatically for all packages!
It’s always better to see the help screen before you answer the questions than after them. Besides, you can rerun the questions as many times as you like with “dpkg-reconfigure”.
You can set the default priority of debconf questions to the level that is most convenient to you. And if you want to configure some packages in more detail, you can just run “dpkg-reconfigure” afterwards using a lower priority.
> It’s always better to see the help screen before you
> answer the questions than after them.
Why would the help be shown when you don’t need it anymore?!? Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, right? Or was that supposed to be a joke that I’m too stupid to get?
Anyway, if the help is shown before you need it you have to memorize the whole thing (actually I take screen shots, or if it’s in a console I’ll use my digital camerah) since you don’t know what you’ll need.
Ugh.
Obviously you want help when you need it. Neither before, nor after.
> Besides, you can rerun the questions as many times as you
> like with “dpkg-reconfigure”.
Yeah, sure. Installing a bunch of packages would become so much fun when you have to write down which packages aptitude installs and then after exiting aptitude run dpkg-reconfigure manually for each of them.
> You can set the default priority of debconf questions to
> the level that is most convenient to you.
As I said, the level is different depending on which package I’m installing. I might be an expert on development utilities but know almost nothing about stuff like X11 internals. There is no one single level that would be “most convenient to [me]”.
> And if you want to configure some packages in more
> detail, you can just run “dpkg-reconfigure” afterwards
> using a lower priority.
If I wanted more work for myself I wouldn’t use debian based distros, now would I?
There’s no reason to torture yourself. If debconf seems too difficult for your intellectual capacity, just set the priority to “critical” and debconf shouldn’t ask you too many questions. And if it still asks something, just keep hitting Enter until the questions go away. Problem solved.
> If debconf seems too difficult for your intellectual capacity,
> just set the priority to “critical” and debconf shouldn’t
> ask you too many questions. And if it still asks something,
> just keep hitting Enter until the questions go away.
Huh? (You must be the guy who decided how debconf should provide help, because it seems quite unrealistic that there would be two people so dumb.)
Let’s consider some emergency instructions on a helicopter. The instructions have 10 steps and the first is “1. Press the red button to eject the door.”
Now the conversation goes:
Me: It’s stupid to have those instructions on the inside of the door since the door gets ejected.
You: It’s always better to have them on the inside of the door rather than on the outside of it. Besides, you could always land, pick up the ejected door and start over.
(JohnMG: You can use a door with hinges so that when it’s “ejected” you can still read the instructions by sticking your head out the doorway.)
Me: Obviously it would be better to put the instructions on the inside next to the door so you wouldn’t have to memorize them before starting to execute them.
You: If it’s too difficult for your intellectual capacity, just ignore the instructions. Problem solved.
It tells something of your powers of concentration that you can’t remember the help offered to you in the previous screen.
But you’re missing my point: debconf works for you even if you cannot figure out the correct answers. Debconf has in-built default answers that you can accept by hitting Enter. If you always accept the default answers, you’ll miss many customization options but debconf still tries to make everything all right for you.
You’ve just got to love debconf for that, don’t you agree?
> It tells something of your powers of concentration that you
> can’t remember the help offered to you in the previous screen.
Just like it’s perfect to have the emergency instructions on the helicopter door that gets ejected, right?
You are completely missing the point. Usually I don’t need any instructions at all, but I don’t know whether I need any or not until I see the fricking question. Now debconf forces me to read (and memorize) whole screens of text just because I might need it. Instead it should provide help on demand, don’t you agree?
> But you’re missing my point: debconf works for you even if
> you cannot figure out the correct answers.
No, you are missing the point: it’s NOT that I can’t figure out the correct answers or that I don’t want to answer questions. I want to answer any questions that might make the system better, but I don’t want to read and memorize tons of help screens that I don’t need. However, I do want to read help screens if/when I need them. (I hope you get it now, because I don’t think I can describe this obvious fact any simpler.)
Don’t you think a good solution, and much better than the current one, would be to have a Help button on each screen, and when/if you need help regarding some question you press the help button? (E.g., like the kernel menuconfig does it, although in the case of debconf there should probably only be one help per screen instead of one per field like in menuconfig.)
Also, don’t you think it would be a good thing to add optional support for debconf asking for the question level every time it starts configuring a package? (Of course it should not ask for the level if there are no questions above a user-specified level. The default answer on the question level selection should also be user-specified so that it would usually be enough to just press enter/next/continue.)
Just like it’s perfect to have the emergency instructions on the helicopter door that gets ejected, right?
I might be wrong but I don’t think that debconf is used much in helicopters.
Don’t you think a good solution, and much better than the current one, would be to have a Help button on each screen, and when/if you need help regarding some question you press the help button?
IIRC, gkdebconf already has this kind of help buttons.
Also, don’t you think it would be a good thing to add optional support for debconf asking for the question level every time it starts configuring a package?
People would complain a lot if it was made this way. They would ask: Why do I have to set the priority level for every package separately? Why cannot I set it once and for all and be done with it?
As I already said, you can rerun any of the debconf questions later, as many times as you like. If you use “dpkg-reconfigure” without any options, the priority is automatically set to the lowest level. But you can also reconfigure packages individually, adding some command line options that tell debconf to use the priority level of your choice (see “man dpkg-reconfigure”).
> > Just like it’s perfect to have the emergency instructions
> > on the helicopter door that gets ejected, right?
>
> I might be wrong but I don’t think that debconf is used
> much in helicopters.
Huh?!? What has that got to do with the issue at hand?
(The wheel seems to be spinning but the hamster is obviously dead.)
> > Don’t you think a good solution, and much better than
> > the current one, would be to have a Help button on each
> > screen, and when/if you need help regarding some question
> > you press the help button?
>
> IIRC, gkdebconf already has this kind of help buttons.
You didn’t answer my question.
> > Also, don’t you think it would be a good thing to add
> > optional support for debconf asking for the question
> > level every time it starts configuring a package?
>
> People would complain a lot if it was made this way.
> They would ask: Why do I have to set the priority level
> for every package separately? Why cannot I set it once
> and for all and be done with it?
So, you’re both stupid and blind. How about reading that quote again now that I have highlighted the relevant word?
IIRC, gkdebconf already has this kind of help buttons.
Unless I am mistaken, the original poster would like to have this feature in the console interface. Currently, if you skip an help screen by mistake, you will have to note down the package and reconfigure it later. It justs make more sense to have help-on-demand, just like with the kernel configuration.
It’s one of the things I hate with debconf. Shit can happen.
Unless I am mistaken, the original poster would like to have this feature in the console interface. Currently, if you skip an help screen by mistake, you will have to note down the package and reconfigure it later. It justs make more sense to have help-on-demand, just like with the kernel configuration.
You know how to submit feature requests, don’t you? I was trying to inform this complaining poster about some of the available workarounds, but she wouldn’t listen.
It’s one of the things I hate with debconf. Shit can happen.
Sounds like there are lots of things you hate with debconf. I’d be curious to learn what these things are.
IMO, criticism is always healthy as long as you first make sure that your criticism is justified.
> I was trying to inform this complaining poster about some
> of the available workarounds, but she wouldn’t listen.
I already have a better workaround than anything you’ve hinted at, and I already told you that: “actually I take screen shots, or if it’s in a console I’ll use my digital camera”.
In fact, the only useful thing you’ve said was your mention of dpkg-reconfigure (which I use all the time), but you did that before my first post so that couldn’t have been a response to me. All your responses to me have been misinterpretations, redundancy and/or insults. Also, you still haven’t acknowledged that the two suggestions in my first post were good (and even obvious), not that it matters…
And btw, her name is Marcus.
For some strange reason you seem to be very upset and I don’t wish to upset you more. Anyway, here’s one last attempt to explain why your complaints don’t seem adequate from my point of view.
Usually people have no trouble remembering what they’ve just read in the previous help screen (about five to fifteen seconds ago). If they can’t remember what it said in the help screen, they either haven’t actually read the help screen at all or they’ve got the attention span of a five year old child. Either way, it’s easy enough to reconfigure the package afterwards. This is why I don’t think that your complaint is a serious one.
Your argument was that it’s impossible to return to the help screen if you’ve somehow missed it. This is not true — you can easily return to the help screen by reconfiguring the package. And you can do it as many times as you want. So, IMO, your complaint isn’t justified. It would only be justified if you didn’t know about the possibility of reconfiguring packages afterwards.
I told you several times that you can return to the help screen as many times as you like by reconfiguring packages but you keep on insisting your original argument. If you prefer to take screenshots, that’s fine by me. Do what ever you want, just don’t persist that your argument is valid. It isn’t.
In your first post you also claim that one can’t choose different debconf priority for individual packages. Again, the answer is that you can if you reconfigure the package. “man dpkg-reconfigure” will tell you how to do this. So, your second complaint is justified only as long as you’re not aware of the possibility of reconfiguring packages. But you keep on insisting the validity of your arguments even though I’ve repeatedly pointed out the option that you can reconfigure packages afterwards.
OK, it would be nice if all debconf interfaces (even the ncurses dialog) had a separate on-demand help screen available for each question. And the option to change the debconf priority level on-the-fly might also be an improvement (although I don’t know if that’s possible to implement in practice). So feel free to submit these feature requests via Debian’s bug tracking system’s “wishlist” category.
But, as far as I’m concerned, these are very minor complaints because there are very easy workarounds available. I’ve already pointed out these workarounds: gkdebconf has just the kind of help screens you’re asking for and the command line “dpkg-reconfigure” command allows you to apply your preferred priority level in reconfiguring individual packages.
I’d also like to add that you chose to use highly inflammatory tone in your first post. When you start off insulting others, you shouldn’t be surprised that you get insults in return. If you decide to submit feature requests for debconf, I suggest that you change your attitude. Developers are often glad to receive feedback and suggestions for improvements from users but I’d hazard a guess that your requests are not likely to be read at all if you start by telling how much you hate their program.
> If they can’t remember what it said in the help screen,
> they either haven’t actually read the help screen at all
> or they’ve got the attention span of a five year old child.
You still don’t get it, so I’ll break it down for you:
A) I don’t want to read help that I don’t need.
B) I don’t want to memorize or write down the names of the packages and reconfigure them afterwards.
C) Even if I decide to read the instructions although I have no idea whether I’ll need them or not they are often of a nature that is hard to remember, such as “nocaps:ctrl devboot={lun0:dev3:up:yours}”.
D) All of this is irrelevant, since my original complaint was that the current design is blazingly obviously suboptimal.
> Your argument was that it’s impossible to return to the
> help screen if you’ve somehow missed it. This is not true
That’s a misinterpretation. Since the existence of dpkg-reconfigure was already established I thought it’d be obvious that I meant that it’s impossible to return to the help screen without completing the current installation/upgrade task and returning to configure the packages manually. I apologize for being vague.
> I told you several times that you can return to the help
> screen as many times as you like by reconfiguring packages
> but you keep on insisting your original argument.
I’ve told you that one can land the helicopter, pick up the door and do it all again as many times as one wants. Yet that doesn’t make it a good idea to put the instructions on the damn door.
The fact that one can run dpkg-reconfigure afterwards doesn’t make it a good idea to have a help screen that vanishes before you actually need it.
The idea to “go back and start again” does not hold, as can be easily shown by some simple reductio ad absurdum:
Person1: I want text editors (e.g. nano) to have undo functionality.
Person2: No! You don’t need any stinking undo! Just reload the file from your last saved version and do all changes again.
Of how about not having any kind of recovery systems? After all, if you make an error you can always wipe your HDD and reinstall the OS and your programs and recreate your documents etc. Although this is true it is obviously a bad idea, QED.
> you also claim that one can’t choose different debconf
> priority for individual packages
Another misinterpretation on your part. When I said “when you start configuring a package” I meant when the configuration starts e.g. when running aptitude. Again I apologize for being needlessly vague.
Debian is usually about doing things The Right Way(tm), but having to run dpkg-reconfigure manually for each package is not anywhere near that.
My complaints were both about annoyances. Any workarounds that are equally (or more) annoying are thus not workarounds at all. Your suggestion to use gkdebconf would have been good but it’s not possible for me since I use a remote terminal (which was hinted at in my mention of scrolling in screen) and vnc is slow and remote X servers kill applications at network hickups.
Now, JohnMG, on the other hand, mentioned a real workaround, since having access to the help message when you need it might outweigh the negative aspects of having to use the command line interface.
Wrawrat also understood my point completely. Anyway, I don’t feel that we need to argue about if my ability to explain things is worse than your ability to understand what is written. That would get us nowhere, so let’s just conclude this discussion and have no hard feelings. 🙂
The idea to “go back and start again” does not hold, as can be easily shown by some simple reductio ad absurdum:
Person1: I want text editors (e.g. nano) to have undo functionality.
Person2: No! You don’t need any stinking undo! Just reload the file from your last saved version and do all changes again.
Of how about not having any kind of recovery systems? After all, if you make an error you can always wipe your HDD and reinstall the OS and your programs and recreate your documents etc. Although this is true it is obviously a bad idea, QED.
Reconfiguring a package requires typically only answering one or two quick questions. And even if there are many questions, debconf remembers your previous answers, so you can just skip them by pressing Enter until you get to the actual question where you want to give a different answer.
Ergo, you don’t need to do all your changes again. And you certainly don’t need to wipe your HDD and reinstall the whole OS just to reconfigure a package via debconf.
Still, no hard feelings. 🙂
> you don’t need to do all your changes again.
True, but you still have to go back and start again. Just because you don’t have to do everything again doesn’t mean that you don’t have to do anything again.
> And you certainly don’t need to wipe your HDD and reinstall
> the whole OS just to reconfigure a package via debconf.
Just so we’re clear, I’ve never even hinted that you’d have to do that.
> Reconfiguring a package requires typically only answering
> one or two quick questions.
Assuming you’re refering to the issue at hand (i.e., the extra work needed because of the debconf stupidity) then that’s a blatant lie. As stated several times, it requires you to write down (or memorize) which packages to reconfigure. Then when your current install/upgrade is finished (by which time you might have forgot what the questions in question were about) you exit aptitude and have to run dpkg-reconfigure for each of those packages manually. Only when running dpkg-reconfigure may you press Enter until you find the correct help screen and read it. If it contains unintuitive codes or other stuff that is hard to remember even for 15 seconds you then have to write it down (or memorize or take screenshot or copy to the clipboard). Then you are able to continue the configuration where you left off prevously.
You have to do all this extra stuff just because the author of debconf is unable to do The Right Thing(tm) even when it’s blazingly obvious. Granted, it’s not the end of the world or anything. Still, it’s quite annoying and yet seems extremely easy to fix (assuming one is familiar with the codebase).
Notice that I didn’t bitch about the fact that debconf should be a wizard (i.e. have a Back button and a non-committing Next). That would be a feature request, and although being obvious it would probably require a lot of work. On the other hand, there is no excuse what so ever for the “features” I bitched about to be missing. (In the same spirit I would never call it a feature that some ordinary car’s wheels are round. It’s just an obvious design choice, and there is certainly no excuse for making wheels that are worse than normal round ones.)
Edited 2006-06-11 04:05
> Reconfiguring a package requires typically only answering
> one or two quick questions.
Assuming you’re refering to the issue at hand (i.e., the extra work needed because of the debconf stupidity) then that’s a blatant lie.
It’s your own stupidity (i.e. poor memory and/or unwillingness to read help screens) that makes you do the extra work with debconf.
And I’m not lying. I meant exactly what I said. Reconfiguring a package via debconf is a fast, easy and simple task for most users once they’ve learned how it’s done. And in most cases reconfiguring packages is not even necessary. The in-built default answers are usually just fine and most users can accept the default answers by just hitting Enter when debconf questions pop up.
But I can understand that you’re not like most users. You are special. You find debconf difficult and you think it’s difficult because of its poor design. That’s fine by me. I wish you lots of unhappy times with debconf. 😛
> It’s your own stupidity (i.e. poor memory and/or
> unwillingness to read help screens) that makes you do the
> extra work with debconf.
Oh, for crying out loud! Just answer this: Do you think it’s a good idea to put the emergency instructions on the door of the helicopter? “It’s your own stupidity (i.e. poor memory and/or unwillingness to read help screens) that makes you [have to go find the door after it’s been ejected]”, right?
I have already shown that having on-demand help is better for everyone, so why do you continue to imply that it’s better only for “stupid” users?
> And I’m not lying.
If you meant the extra work then of course you were lying, since the extra work does not only include what you mentioned. If you referred to only the actual configurating then you were obviously talking about the wrong thing, since nobody has said that the actual configuration is cumbersome or annoying. So either you were lying or just stupid.
> You find debconf difficult and you think it’s difficult
> because of its poor design.
Stop lying already! I don’t think it’s difficult. It’s not that I can’t get my packages configured. Its piss-poor design just makes it annoying to use.
> But I can understand that you’re not like most users.
Because most users aren’t annoyed by annoying things? Because most users are just used to constantly bending over and taking it up their asses, thinking “well, apparently this is how it’s done, so I’ll just get on with the program”?
It’s true that many people can’t grasp things before they get used to them themselves. They say “we don’t need this or that”, but once they’ve (reluctantly) gotten used to it they think it’s great and would never give it up. I’ve seen this happen hundreds of times. (It’s often easy to observe in programmers. First they don’t want anything but notepad. Then they reluctantly get used to syntax highlighting and would never want to be without it, but want nothing else. Then the same thing happens with code completion, folding, integrated debugging, etc. ad infinitum, and at every step they proclaim: “I don’t need anything else because I can already do anything and everything with what I use now!”) To me it seems quite likely that you are one of those people, so by all means, just continue bending over and stop bitching when others would rather not bend over.
> [snip] but that extra help should be provided as a
> separate screen BEFORE the questions where you need it.
Not sure, but I think if you tell debconf to use the command-line interface instead of the ncurses one, maybe the help messages would still show up but you could then scroll up to read them?
> > [snip] but that extra help should be provided as a
> > separate screen BEFORE the questions where you need it.
>
> Not sure, but I think if you tell debconf to use the
> command-line interface instead of the ncurses one, maybe
> the help messages would still show up but you could then
> scroll up to read them?
Ah, clever. Now I’ll just have to figure out how to get scrolling working with screen. Thanks.
I like gkDebconf since it provides a nice gtk gui to the whole Debconf thing as well as list all the packages you can use Debconf with. GkDebconf has some nice help information on what some questions mean and it is easier to go back and change answers to previous questions.
For those relatively new to Debian or who just like a gui when there is a choice, gkDebconf is a good extra tool to have around, imho.
I think the really bad think is you can’t switch off or don’t install debconf at all!
I’ve read some Debian posts, where main developers warned other developers that debconf shouldn’t be treated like Windows registry, but it seems the effect is not convincing. Many times after reinstalling or upgrading I was wondering, why my hand edited configs were changed – so my confidence in Debian is very limited.
In my opinion Debian is going too far trying to race with other distros in user friendliness while most of its users are pretty advanced. There are more and more distros for common users and distros for admins or developers are going to be scarce.
I think that possibility of editing configs by hand and to control the system is one of the greatest *nix features and one of the main reasons to use something else then Windows for example. Unfortunately in Debian I see more and more config files with: “Don’t edit by hand!” warnings. Will the next step be: “You have to use our XWindow clicking setup program!” to configure cups for example (like in Ubuntu).
And one question out of subject: Why Debian must be so different! Is it very shameful to change you way sometimes (even if it is slightly better) and do something like almost all others do? I mean /etc/sysconfig/ for example.
Jarek P.
Many times after reinstalling or upgrading I was wondering, why my hand edited configs were changed – so my confidence in Debian is very limited.
Can you give some specific example? I know for sure that debconf doesn’t change xorg.conf if you’ve edited it manually. And debconf usually detects if some config file has been edited and it asks you if you would like it to install a new config file provided by the upstream developer or if you’d rather keep your manually edited file. And the default action (if you just hit Enter) is to keep your hand edited version. You need to specifically type “y” and then hit Enter if you want to install the new config file that overrides the changes you’ve made.
Unfortunately in Debian I see more and more config files with: “Don’t edit by hand!” warnings.
Yes, there are some files in Debian that have these kinds of warnings. But there are usually also some directions that tell you some other way that you CAN edit these configurations by hand. For example, /etc/fonts/fonts.conf says “DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE” but just after that it says “LOCAL CHANGES BELONG IN ‘local.conf'”. So you can create /etc/fonts/local.conf (or ~/.fonts.conf) that will override any debconf settings, and you can edit this local conf file by hand as much as you want. Contrary to what you suggest, you can always override debconf settings by editing config files manually.
And one question out of subject: Why Debian must be so different! Is it very shameful to change you way sometimes (even if it is slightly better) and do something like almost all others do? I mean /etc/sysconfig/ for example.
I don’t know why everyone thinks that RedHat peculiarities should always automatically become the standard that all other distros need to follow. In Debian /etc/default/ does pretty much the same as /etc/sysconfig/ in RedHat. Every distro has its own peculiar ways of doing some things and I don’t believe that Debian is quite as different from others as you give to understand.
Many times after reinstalling or upgrading I was wondering, why my hand edited configs were changed – so my confidence in Debian is very limited.
Can you give some specific example?
Yes: /etc/console-tools/config very often. Maybe it was corrected in current versions, but I’m simply not interested in testing this “feature” with every package versions.
Unfortunately in Debian I see more and more config files with: “Don’t edit by hand!” warnings.
Yes, there are some files in Debian that have these kinds of warnings. But there are usually also some directions that tell you some other way that you CAN edit these configurations by hand. For example, /etc/fonts/fonts.conf says “DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE” but just after that it says “LOCAL CHANGES BELONG IN ‘local.conf'”. So you can create /etc/fonts/local.conf (or ~/.fonts.conf) that will override any debconf settings, and you can edit this local conf file by hand as much as you want. Contrary to what you suggest, you can always override debconf settings by editing config files manually.
And you really think I have spare time and memory to remember, where the options are stored originally (by program manual), what are their names and where to change them in Debian, and not to forget to check if they are OK in all possible places?
And one question out of subject: Why Debian must be so different! Is it very shameful to change you way sometimes (even if it is slightly better) and do something like almost all others do? I mean /etc/sysconfig/ for example.
I don’t know why everyone thinks that RedHat peculiarities should always automatically become the standard that all other distros need to follow.
Maybe because some RedHat peculiarities are also SUSE, and Mandriva peculiarities and because standards are not created for fun.
Edited 2006-06-09 09:48
Yes: /etc/console-tools/config very often.
That’s funny, because I have also modified my /etc/console-tools/config and debconf has NEVER overwritten my settings there.
And you really think I have spare time and memory to remember, where the options are stored originally (by program manual), what are their names and where to change them in Debian, and not to forget to check if they are OK in all possible places?
I couldn’t say anything about your spare time or your memory. Based on my own experience, it’s easy: you learn them once and that’s all you need to do. If you forget, Debian has very good documentation for each package in /usr/share/doc/package_name/. And there’s often README.Debian that in most cases tells you what you need to know. Also, if some application’s exec command doesn’t have a man page, it’s considered a release critical bug in Debian. And there are man pages for many config files, too. Excellent documentation is one good reason to favour Debian.
Maybe because some RedHat peculiarities are also SUSE, and Mandriva peculiarities and because standards are not created for fun.
Let me repeat: RedHat peculiarities are NOT standards. Mandriva is based on RedHat and SUSE is also modelled after RedHat. But there are more Debian-based distros than there are RedHat/Mandriva/SUSE-based distros put together.
That’s funny, because I have also modified my /etc/console-tools/config and debconf has NEVER overwritten my settings there.
Yes it’s very funny. But maybe it could be changed.
Do you think it is impossible to let user choose if he/she wants debconf instaled and, if not, install packages only. Some linux distros and BSD flavors can do that and don’t care it’s not funny.
I couldn’t say anything about your spare time or your memory. Based on my own experience, it’s easy: you learn them once and that’s all you need to do.
Some people say learning Windows registry isn’t so hard also!
Let me repeat: RedHat peculiarities are NOT standards.
Let me repeat: maybe it’s in common interest they sometimes should be.
Mandriva is based on RedHat and SUSE is also modelled after RedHat. But there are more Debian-based distros than there are RedHat/Mandriva/SUSE-based distros put together.
And this is the main reason not to do anything like RedHat does?
Edited 2006-06-09 11:10
Do you think it is impossible to let user choose if he/she wants debconf instaled and, if not, install packages only.
Debian can’t be installed without debconf. But I still think you have specifically asked debconf to overwrite your own settings. Debconf has never overwritten any of my settings without asking my permission first. And I’ve been using Debian for some years now, so I’m pretty sure that this is the default debconf behaviour.
Let me repeat: RedHat peculiarities are NOT standards.
Let me repeat: maybe it’s in common interest they sometimes should be.
I agree. There exists the Free Standards Group http://www.freestandards.org/en/Main_Page lead by Ian Murdock (Debian’s founder) that is working to establish common standards that all distros can follow. So there is development in the right direction and the future looks bright. Still, the fact remains: RedHat peculiarities are not standards.
But I still think you have specifically asked debconf to overwrite your own settings. Debconf has never overwritten any of my settings without asking my permission first. And I’ve been using Debian for some years now, so I’m pretty sure that this is the default debconf behaviour.
And I think we are living in great times – people have more confidence in a program then in other human!
And I think we are living in great times – people have more confidence in a program then in other human!
OK, it’s quite possible that there is (or has been) a bug in debconf. But it has never hit me, that’s all I’m saying.
OK, it’s quite possible that there is (or has been) a bug in debconf. But it has never hit me, that’s all I’m saying.
My real point is that even if debconf has no bugs, is not overwriting anything and is perfect, I don’t like this idea of helping at any price and I feel Debian is not one who should do that the best.