Philip Hands <p...@hands.com> writes:

> I presume we'd want to continue providing /usr/bin/nodejs for people
> that have switched to using that, so that might as well continue to be
> the name of the binary, since that gives us a 'node' symlink that is
> self-documenting.

That sounds plausible to me. I don't think it matters which one is the
symlink. For some some reason, on my own system I have a shell script
called node in my path that execs nodejs, that also seems to work fine.

> Is there any need to have a versioned Conflicts against old versions of
> ax25-node/node?

Or maybe a Breaks, since "This use of Breaks will inform higher-level
package management tools that the broken package must be upgraded before
the new one." (7.3)

d

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to