On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 10:09:44PM -0600, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
So, I'm proposing this:
GNU Interactive Tools installs /usr/bin/git.shell (or something)
Cogito installs /usr/bin/git.scm (or something)
update-alternatives is used to make one of those appear as
On Aug 11, Sebastian Kuzminsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People who just want GNU Interactive Tools get what they want. People who
just want Cogito get what they want. People who want both have to learn
a new name for one of them. Seems good to me. Am I missing anything?
Reality? git is the
[Marco d'Itri]
Reality? git is the kernel SCM and GNU Interactive Tools is an
obscure package, and you should just install /usr/bin/git.
If the GNU Interactive Tools maintainer refuses to rename the other
program then just conflict with it.
Ah, conflict resolution by the use of force. The
Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
All packages which supply an instance of a common command name (or, in
general, filename) should generally use update-alternatives, so that
they may be installed together. If update-alternatives is not used,
then each package must use Conflicts to
Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Marco d'Itri]
Reality? git is the kernel SCM and GNU Interactive Tools is an
obscure package, and you should just install /usr/bin/git.
If the GNU Interactive Tools maintainer refuses to rename the other
program then just conflict with it.
Quoting Sebastian Kuzminsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've pushed the rename it upstream idea on the upstream maintainers
twice now and it gets shut down by both Linus (the original author)
and Junio (the current maintainer). [2]
There is still the option to rename it for Debian only,
without
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 09:20:23AM -0600, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
Qingning Huo suggested using diversions to make /usr/bin/git a little
selector script that lets the admin user choose between git-the-shell
and git-the-scm. This sounds good to me, who objects?
What are you going to do
Scripsit W. Borgert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Either rename the executable to /usr/bin/git-the-scm (or
whatever) or conflict with the other git.
Conflicting is Not An Option. So policy says, for good reasons.
Or ask the other git people to rename their binary. Maybe
git-the-scm is (or will be) in
Quoting Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Conflicting is Not An Option. So policy says, for good reasons.
OK, bad idea.
There is precedence to consider. Sarge already contains a git package
that provides /usr/bin/git. Users who update from sarge to etch would
not be served well if the
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 05:28:48PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 09:20:23AM -0600, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
Qingning Huo suggested using diversions to make /usr/bin/git a little
selector script that lets the admin user choose between git-the-shell
and
Qingning Huo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggest dpkg-divert /usr/bin/git, and install a shell script as
/usr/bin/git, which will invoke either program depending on a certain
environment variable[1] or a configuration file. It is possible to achieve
the following objectives.
(1) Installing
Scripsit Sebastian Kuzminsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Qingning Huo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggest dpkg-divert /usr/bin/git, and install a shell script as
/usr/bin/git, which will invoke either program depending on a certain
environment variable[1] or a configuration file.
Does this solution
shouldn't I use
update-alternatives?
The only other mention I found of update-alternatives was in Appendix
F of the Policy Manual, here:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ap-pkg-alternatives.html
Appendix F is marked as being from old Packaging Manual. The wording
here suggests
an
instance of a common command name (/usr/bin/git). So shouldn't I use
update-alternatives?
No. Alternatives provide several implementations of similiar
functionality, and allow the user to select the preferred one.
Cogito and git provide _different_ functionality.
Thiemo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
14 matches
Mail list logo
