On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 23:41, Number Six wrote: > Proposal, additions to Policy and changes to dpkg: > > (3) Add /etc/friendlynames and update-friendlynames to dpkg, which > works similar to /etc/alternatives except applications sharing > names are not expected to provide similar functionality or > accept identical arguments. > If this is identical to alternatives in functionality, and it sounds like it is, then that's how it should be implemented. Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part