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). Thanks, Fabian -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
