Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> writes: > I presume we'd want to continue providing /usr/bin/nodejs for people > that have switched to using that, so that might as well continue to be > the name of the binary, since that gives us a 'node' symlink that is > self-documenting. That sounds plausible to me. I don't think it matters which one is the symlink. For some some reason, on my own system I have a shell script called node in my path that execs nodejs, that also seems to work fine. > Is there any need to have a versioned Conflicts against old versions of > ax25-node/node? Or maybe a Breaks, since "This use of Breaks will inform higher-level package management tools that the broken package must be upgraded before the new one." (7.3) d
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature