Yes I noticed that. And I see that this makes it more difficult. But I still think it should be changed.
About open being a symlink to openvt: I think that is not a good idea. "open" is a very general command-name and shouldn't be taken by something such specific as openvt (i.e. execute a given command in a new virtual terminal). If there are scripts which rely on that, I think they should be fixed. I actually doubt that because the authors of scripts would very likely have used openvt in the first way. Btw., was this symlink introduced upstream or introduced by Debian/Ubuntu? The latter would make it a bit more simple to fix. You could maybe take the same argument that something as general as "open" should also not symlink to "xdg-open". My thought was basically like this: If "open" means actually anything, it should have the most natural meaning and do what people who don't know about it would thought. This is clearly to open a file. And the most natural way to open a file is to open it with the default application for that file type. Of course this assumption may be subjective and arguable but my common sense tells me that this would make sense only this way. Also, to support that argument even more: MacOSX also has an "open" command which does exactly that. Because xdg-open already behaves mostly like that, a symlink from open to xdg-open would be an easy solution. -- open should be an alias to xdg-open https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/619913 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
