[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Intention to re-write /usr/sbin/install-info

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997, James R. Van Zandt wrote:

> Brandon Mitchell <bhmit1@mail.wm.edu> writes:
> >If install-info have a different interface with the same name, we should
> >change it.  However, an immediate change would probably upset some people.
> >Instead, move debian's install-info to dinstall-info and make a script
> >where /usr/sbin/install-info was:
> >...
> >echo "This is debian's install-info, which is now called dinstall-info."
> >echo "The normal install-info is in /usr/bin.  This script will fall back"
> >echo "on debian's install-info.  Please make any necessary changes so you"
> >echo "don't see this warning since this forward will be removed in the"
> >echo "future."
> >sleep 10
> This strikes me as a bad idea.  The sysadmin gets a warning and a ten
> second wait for every package he installs that uses install-info.
> (That's worse than the tetex package check, because there are many
> more packages that install info pages.)  Also, the warning does not
> tell him what to change.
> Why are there two versions, anyway?  Was FSF unaware of our version
> when they wrote theirs, or did theirs come first?  I think a single
> program should be written which includes the functionality of both the
> Debian and gnu versions of install-info.  Debian should distribute the
> combined program.  If possible, we should pursuade FSF to distribute
> it too.

I agree that if we can combine them, let's do it.  But it has to be in
such a way that the interface works for both versions.  Otherwise, we have
an incompatable program again.

> If we have to maintain independent, incompatible installers, then I
> agree we should change the name of ours.  In that case, deb-make,
> debstd, deblint, and/or Guy's package acceptance scripts on master
> should enforce use of the new name.  Both names should stay valid
> (with no warnings to the sysadmin) until most of the packages are
> updated to use the new name.

I agree with your complaints about this, so lets see if something can be
worked out:
1) I believe dinstall-info and install-info have different interfaces, but
   I'm not sure what is better.  Apparently, installing non-debian
   packages will result in problems because of our install-info.  I don't
   know who came first.
2) dinstall-info should added immediately, with /usr/sbin/install-info
   symlinked to it.
3) Debian packages should now use dinstall-info (we can give them, say a
4) Once the month is up, put in the install-info warning I have above.
   The message can be changed.  The 10 seconds was to give the user enough
   time to write down the package name for a bug report.  An experienced
   sys adm can change or remove the script.  If they are installing
   non-debian packages, they will probably want to point it to
   /usr/bin/install-info instead.

I personally thought the message was descriptive enough.  What would you
change?  Have I answered all your complaints?


Brandon Mitchell                         E-mail: bhmit1@mail.wm.edu
  Homepage: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/7877/home.html
                  PGP: finger -l bhmit1@cs.wm.edu                 
"We all know Linux is great...it does infinite loops in 5 seconds."
	--Linus Torvalds

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: