Le 24/05/2012 22:14, Jeff Squyres a écrit : > On May 24, 2012, at 11:30 AM, Brice Goglin wrote: > >> So what you dislike isn't the split, it's the fact that lstopo doesn't >> behave as it did earlier. You want lstopo-nogui and lstopo instead of >> lstopo and lstopo-gui. And alternative systems can make lstopo point to >> lstopo-nogui when the real lstopo isn't installed. > Taking a step back and looking objectively, I think that's a good assessment > and probably a good simple solution (i.e., make "lstopo" be the one with the > Cario/etc. support). > > FWIW, "gui" and "nogui" are not necessarily good names. The current > lstopo-gui isn't really a traditional GUI application (even though it can > display a trivial X window). I seem to recall that "nox" was discarded as a > possibility, because lstopo supports more than just X. > > Are there other traditional suffixes that are used for this kind of thing? > Or is lstopo kinda unique in this area? >
There are lshw and lshw-gtk and others examples where the suffix is the toolkit name. We could use "-text" but that doesn't seem very common either. Same for "-nox" which may also not look obvious to random users. For sure "-nogui" is bad a name :) Brice
