Re: netpbm vs. pbmplus
Interesting. I'm working on debian packages for kerberos (I have some
that are good enough for my own use, but are not quite ready for
release) and have a slightly different reason for using a seperate
directory: name collisions. In particular, kerberos provides programs
named rlogin, rsh, rcp, ftp, telnet, and others, which are
replacements for the normal versions. *however* in the case of rlogin,
rsh, and rcp, if the kerberos one fails, it falls back to actually
running the "native" version.
In general, we've just done the equivalent of a prefix=/usr/kerberos
and that has worked fine, but seems to be counter to what is dicussed
here. I suppose that exec-prefix=/usr/bin/kerberos prefix=/usr is
about right?
At MIT, users can select packages using "add package", which does roughly
* mounts the package [usually on /mit/package]
* adds $mountpoint/arch/$sys/bin to the user's path
This is not unlike the svr4 use of /opt/package, though I haven't seen
standardized convenience aliases (every sysadmin and half the users
write their own :-) I suppose these mechanisms don't fit in either?
Reply to: