Package: gromacs, radiance
Severity: serious
Justification: policy violation
hi,
both gromacs and radiance ship `/usr/bin/genbox' but do neither conflict nor
add a diversion, thus fail to be installed in the same environment:
Unpacking gromacs (from .../gromacs_3.3.1-7_amd64.deb) ...
dpkg:
On 10/15/07, Michael Ablassmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: gromacs, radiance
Severity: serious
Justification: policy violation
hi,
both gromacs and radiance ship `/usr/bin/genbox' but do neither conflict nor
add a diversion, thus fail to be installed in the same environment:
Hi,
both gromacs and radiance ship `/usr/bin/genbox' but do neither conflict nor
add a diversion, thus fail to be installed in the same environment:
Unpacking gromacs (from .../gromacs_3.3.1-7_amd64.deb) ...
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/gromacs_3.3.1-7_amd64.deb
Hi,
I suggest:
rename genbox to g_genbox, add a comment to gromacs' README.Debian,
what's your opinion?
Ignore my last mail please.
I can also rename genbox to radgenbox.
I guess your package attracts more people, so it should probably keep
the binaries name. On the other side - if genbox
Hi Bernd!
Am Montag, den 15.10.2007, 13:23 +0200 schrieb Bernd Zeimetz:
I can also rename genbox to radgenbox.
I guess your package attracts more people, so it should probably keep
the binaries name. On the other side - if genbox is only rarely used in
gromacs, the better thing would be to
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 03:17:52PM +0200, Manuel Prinz wrote:
As a GROMACS user, I'd prefer to keep the name genbox since it's one
of the tools in the GROMACS suite that is used quite often and a lot of
my scripts would need an update to work on a name change. I think there
are more people in
However, radiance also ships a large number of files in /usr/bin, which
I assume are scriptable too? Is renaming the command likely to cause
equivalent problems for your users?
Exactly. About 75% of the programs were made to be run from scripts
and/or other programs to prepare materials and
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 09:03:41PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
As Your package is the older package, and genbox is probably not one of
the very often used tools, I'll rename it in Debian.
It sounds like that will be the least disruptive overall. Thanks very
much.
I'll be making a new upload
Nicholas Breen wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 09:03:41PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
As Your package is the older package, and genbox is probably not one of
the very often used tools, I'll rename it in Debian.
It sounds like that will be the least disruptive overall. Thanks very
much.
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Nicholas Breen wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 09:03:41PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
As Your package is the older package, and genbox is probably not one of
the very often used tools, I'll rename it in Debian.
It sounds like that will be the least disruptive overall.
10 matches
Mail list logo
