Hi, On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 10:45:12AM +0100, Dylan wrote: > Hi Steffen, > > 2014-12-22 10:22 GMT+01:00 "Steffen Möller" <steffen_moel...@gmx.de>: > > > Much in support of Dylan, please also think about the binary filename of > > the executable. We had the unfortunate p-link for Version 1 to avoid a > > clash with one of the putty tools. This was a mistake at the time imho. > > Shall we correct for that? Or is upstream already defaulting to plink2? > > This would then give us p-link and plink2 as executables. Hurts. > > > > > The upstream devs always name the new binary "plink" but they recommend to > rename it to "plink2" and the old plink to "plink1" to avoid the name > conflict. So, I rename the binary plink2 for the new version and maybe we > can also rename the first plink from "p-link" to "plink1" with a symbolic > link to "p-link" to avoid problem for our users which already use the name > "p-link". What do you think?
Sounds good. In addition I would recommend to teach upstream again about the name clash with putty tools. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org