Re: RFC: future of the smbfs and smbfsx packages

[Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>]

Eloy A. Paris <eparis@ven.ra.rockwell.com> wrote:
> Possible Solutions
> ------------------
> 
> Option 1: Create a new small package called smbfs-common that contains
> the wrapper. Then rename the binaries to smbmount-2.0.x and
> smbmount-2.2.x and let the wrapper choose which one to call depending
> on the kernel version that is running. Use alternatives to handle the
> man pages.
> 
> Option 2: Put the wrapper script inside package smbfsx (the wrapper
> isn't needed for the smbfs package because the wrapper emulates the
> good-old syntax of the old smbmount). Then have smbfs conflict with
> smbfsx (they can't be installed at the same time).
> 
> Other options?

Option 3: build a package which includes both sets of binaries
(perhaps stuffed under /usr/lib/smb/) with wrappers which detect
kernel version and run appropriate binary with appropriate 
arguments.

-- 
Raul