#600491 Template libpam-runtime/profiles with text frontend proposes a "none of the above" choice which is bogus

#600491#5
Date:
2010-10-17 15:41:37 UTC
From:
To:
Running
dpkg-reconfigure -ftext libpam-runtime
:

Configuring libpam-runtime
etc.

  1. Unix authentication
  2. GNOME Keyring Daemon - Login keyring management
  3. ConsoleKit Session Management
  4. Inheritable Capabilities Management
  5. none of the above


Choice 5 is bogus of course, and choosing that, the
libpam-runtime/no_profiles_chosen template is displayed. Oddly enough,
on second try, that option is not suggested any more.

Samuel

#600491#10
Date:
2010-10-18 03:12:07 UTC
From:
To:
I don't see how this is a bug in libpam-runtime.  This option is added by
the debconf frontend itself.

#600491#15
Date:
2010-10-18 08:24:37 UTC
From:
To:
Steve Langasek, le Sun 17 Oct 2010 20:12:07 -0700, a écrit :

That could be a missing option given to debconf. If not, then feel free
to reassign to debconf.

Samuel

#600491#24
Date:
2010-10-18 16:46:52 UTC
From:
To:
I don't really see a bug in debconf here. Multiselect questions can naturally
be answered by chosing none of the choices. That can be done using any
frontend, and like any other potentially invalid data, it's up to the program
using debconf to validate it.

The debconf readline frontend will behave differently depending on the
backend readline module used. With libterm-readline-gnu-perl it can
prefill the user's input with the default of the question, and the user
can erase it all and submit an empty line to indicate NOTA, so the
explicit "none of the above" choice is not offered there. With the stub
readline module, an empty line has to mean the default value, so an
explicit "none of the above" choice is needed, *unless* the default
value *is* none of the above, then it removes the explicit choice.
I think this explains the behavior described.

It might be a nice extension to debconf to have a flag that indicates
that a multiselect question requires at least one thing be chosen.

#600491#29
Date:
2010-10-18 16:55:20 UTC
From:
To:
I agree on all counts.