Re: libpar-packer-perl and /usr/bin/par
Frank Lichtenheld <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Urgs, no, IMHO being consistent with such stupid extensions is not
> important at all.
> Anyway, in this case it is the easiest method to avoid the conflict, so
> I agree that this is the way to go. But - just for the record ;) - I
> strongly disagree with your reasoning.
I'd be inclined to call it par-archive, rather than par.pl, but it
probably doesn't matter a lot. The problem with par.pl is that the ".pl"
really adds no information about what this par is, and par is pretty
widely known as a formatting program. My first assumption would have been
that it was a reimplementation of par in Perl. par-archive makes it clear
that it's really about managing a particular archive format.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>