Re: Intent to package: F
On Tue, Dec 08, 1998 at 10:43:52PM -0600, Dale James Thompson wrote:
> Should I upload again with the binary named fbrowser?
Please do... after fixing a little nitpick (read on...)
> I changed the name of the package to fbrowser when someone else pointed
> out the namespace pollution problem. But, in the package I left the binary
> named f.
The pollution problem is more serious then. /usr/bin/X11/f is *not* nice. I
don't want to
$ f
and have a file manager launched. That's precisely the kind of situation the
name-space pseudo-policy is trying to address: hard to remember names, names
that can be easily mistyped (as in this case, where I left of a 'd'). We
have enough two-letter commands (ls, mv, cp, bc, cc, nm, ar, mt, ps, ci, co,
nl, as, uz, wc...); the only one-letter commands accepted are [ and w (did I
miss anything?)
That aside, I'd really like to see the package, sounds good!
Marcelo
Reply to: