On 10-08-2017 14:13:29 +0200, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> * Nicolas Bock schrieb am 10.08.17 um 11:35 Uhr:
> > It does of course. What's appropriate here depends on whether we 
> > think somebody might want to have both mutt and neomutt installed 
> > at the same time. If we don't allow this use case, we don't have 
> > to worry about eselect and the neomutt binary will be called 
> > 'mutt' (as it is called by upstream already). If we do allow this 
> > use case, being able to eselect makes sense because then the 
> > binary is still always called 'mutt'.
> Why not just have mutt and/or neomutt for both packages? Whoever only 
> wants neomutt and run it with 'mutt' can "alias mutt=neomutt" and be 
> done.

Both packages install /usr/bin/mutt by upstream's default (because
neomutt is supposed to be a drop-in replacement of mutt).


Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to