On 08/01/23 20:59 +1100, Hamish Moffatt said ...
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 02:07:57PM +0530, Y Giridhar Appaji Nag wrote:
Beginning elinks 0.11.3-2, the elinks and elinks-lite binary packages
don't Provides: links anymore (See bug #154859 and Debian ELinks GIT
commit a885ecead29f808310e6c2908f59f59a8d69b3ac). The links alternative
isn't installed.
Wouldn't have providing a links executable been a better solution?
The codebase, functionality and CLI options for links and elinks are
fast diverging, so calling elinks as links and considering elinks as a
links alternative (in the Debian sense) is probably not fair. If a
links executable were provided, we should conflict with the links
package.
It would have solved the bug but also not broken those other packages.
Even though I did not build or test any of those packages, I have a
feeling it would not be a very bad breakage, and I am hoping I did not
screw up very badly.
But there would be users that use elinks as links because of the
alternative it used to install. I will:
- Document this change in README.Debian
- Have elinks install a /usr/bin/links script indicating this change to
the user and co-ordinate with the links maintainer for a dpkg-divert.
Does that sound reasonable?
Cheers,
Giridhar
--
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag | http://www.appaji.net/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
