Le Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 03:47:28PM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit : > > Well, I do not know the other packages and thus I do not really know > whether it is really acceptable. There are a lot of choices - just > pick a reasonable one: > > 1. Ask upstream to use em_* names - or rename all binaries according > to this (probably not reasonable because users own scripts will > fail. > 2. Use the wrapper method like PhyLip packae does. > 3. Consult popularity contest results for the packages that cause > the name space polution and ask the maintainers / upstream > authors whether they see a chance for a rename. > 4. If popularity contest result fr the other packages is low > your suggested conflicts solution might be acceptable > 5. Use diversions and just divert the other packages names. This > might be a little bit dangerous if you find no reasonable way > to inform users about the fact that the other programs might be > renamed and you have to make sure that the other packages will > not break terrribly.
Dear all, I agree with Andreas that that kind of situation is likely to happen more and more: I understand that people who use frequently a pacakge want short names. But let us look at the bright side of the problem: binary conflicts happen more often in Debian because we have more packages, so it pushes us ahead and gives us an opportunity to innovate first. In the following proposal, I try to combine the best of each points proposed by Andreas with some idea of mine to involve CDDs in the process. * By shipping the binaries in /usr/lib/package, we give the final choice to the user, who can add this on the top of his PATH in order to have a direct access to the programs, without wrappers. * As we are dealing with packages with a low popularity. I think that the proposed solution should work as usual when only one package is installed. * There should be a way in which when aptitude installing one of the competing packages, the user can be sure that the /usr/bin commands will point to his favorite program. How about delegating this role to Custom Debian Distributions ? For instance, EMBOSS is packaged for Debian-Med. It would be great that when the med-common package is installed, the /usr/bin programs would be the EMBOSS ones. All of this calls for having a common wrapper between a pair of packages competing for the same binary name, but I do not know how to implement this if we do not want to introduce a third package. Maybe we could ship the same wrapper in each package, and divert it to avoid conflict between the two copies ? Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy http://charles.plessy.org Wako, Saitama, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
