Re: Intent to adopt: info
On Wed, Apr 14, 1999 at 11:35:59PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > Which leads into making /usr/bin/info maintained by
> > > update-alternatives and some emacs packages providing info
> > > scripts.
> >
> > Which is ugly. I think we should leave the original info binary
> > untouched and use a name as "showinfo" or "infopage" to request a
> > specific page. This binary could be maintained in
> > /etc/alternatives
>
> Why?
If for example info is installed, was happens if you install a new
pinfo which registers itself as alternative with update-alternatives?
I see 2 possibilities:
1. update-alternatives overwrite /usr/bin/info with a link
2. it fails without a sensible config of info. E.g. we have a binary
"info" in /usr/bin, and a link in /etc/alternatives, but the link is
unused..
We could solve this by releasing a new version of info, but then any new
info browser has to conflict with the old info.
cu
Torsten
Reply to: