On Sat, 16 Mar 1996, Ian Jackson wrote: > I think that, given how badly designed colour-ls is, it should be done > in a separate package and should not replace the standard /bin/ls even > if you install it. After all, given that dircolors is spouting stuff > to make aliases anyway it might as well include a path to the modifies > ls.
Fine. So I make a package which includes ls and dircolors in /usr/local/bin. It also adds the dircolors manpage and places a (renamed) config file for dircolors in /usr/local/etc. This is fine if people want to have extra binaries rather than alternate binaries. > You should certainly not release modified versions of other packages > and change only the version number; especially with fileutils (an > Essential package) Slackware uses the patched version of the fileutils exclusively. I have not heard of any functional problems, just aesthetic. However, in the interest of peace and to get the thing released before the turn of the century, I want to sum up this debate soon. As of now, I've got the patched version of the fileutils essentially ready. I will work on the two-binary package as well, and I'll leave it up to the rest of you to decide which is best. I agree that if the package only adds the two files, it must not replace any of the filutils binaries. Syrus. ---------------------------------------------------------- Syrus Nemat-Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> UCSD Physics Dept.
