Problem: if package is already installed and debconf selection for it got changed via debconf.set - the selections will not affect current package state.
Need to provide mechanism to detect changes in debconf selections and signal
dpkg-reconfigure for particular package to enable changes.
Thanks!
Maybe I help tackle this along with the fix for the other issue I just opened. Entries shared among multiple packages in the debconf database may be tricky, but the owner of the entry (package) is in the first column of the debconf line.
Hi,
Any news on this? Does it exists a workaround for this issue?
Thanks!
This one's mostly been lost in the shuffle, not sure if there's a workaround. But I'm going to get it labeled properly so we can get more eyes on it.
Thanks for your answer!
So far so good... 馃槥
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
If this issue is closed prematurely, please leave a comment and we will gladly reopen the issue.
A HighSeverity bug autoclosed, mmh. Stoopid bot! Sit! STAY!
Thank you for updating this issue. It is no longer marked as stale.
I know that the debconf.set state fires changes - is there any reason that this won't work for you?
somestate:
debconf.set:
- name: whatever-thing
- data:
'whatever-thing': {'type': 'boolean', 'value': True}
reconfigurething:
cmd.run:
- name: dpkg-reconfigure -f noninteractive <your thing>
- onchanges:
- debconf: somestate
@waynew I haven't tested it, but that looks good to me. Thanks for the suggestion! I used a different approach by making sure debconf.set was executed before installing the package, but your suggestion is nicer in some ways.
It would be ideal if Salt provided a more direct and intuitive way to execute that command on changes when the package is already installed. eg.
somestate:
debconf.set:
- name: whatever-thing
- data:
'whatever-thing':
'type': 'boolean'
'value': 'true'
- reconfigure: True
@boltronics would it help if we added some information to the docs for debconf? To me it seems like that'd be the most helpful thing here.
I agree, the docs should be updated regardless of any change being implemented.
Anyone have a reason this shouldn't be closed when that PR gets merged?
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
If this issue is closed prematurely, please leave a comment and we will gladly reopen the issue.
Most helpful comment
A HighSeverity bug autoclosed, mmh. Stoopid bot! Sit! STAY!