Re: Package organization issue...
Lars Wirzenius <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> [1 <text/plain; us-ascii (7bit)>]
> [ Please don't Cc: public replies to me. ]
> (I'm feeling that I'm overly negative again. Sorry. I'll shut up if
> someone shows a good example of why a new mechanism for setting up
> default environments is needed.)
I happen to agree with your concerns, so I don't think you're being
overly negative :>
> The only reason to keep MH in its own subdirectory is to allow
> people to avoid it completely. Only people who use MH should pub
> /usr/bin/mh in their path.
Especially since this mechanism can allow packages with duplicate
command names to coexist. Not that the command names shouldn't be
changed so that they don't conflict, but sometimes that's not easily
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .