Re: more overly-generic package names from gnustep
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 05:31:28AM -0800, Number Six wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 01:22:43PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 05:14:38AM -0800, Number Six wrote:
> > > I have some recent experience with this: I made my little package called
> > > "pim." Too generic. The solution was to name the package "tupim", the
> > > and install /usr/bin/tupim, /usr/share/man/man1/tupim.1, and symlink
> > > pim -> tupim, pim.1 -> tupim.1, unless there is already a file by that
> > > name present.
> >
> > Ew! What happens when a package called 'pim' is installed after yours,
> > rather than before?
>
> The desired behavior, no? Their 'pim' is called up instead of mine, and
> mine can be still launched by 'tupim'. Munge the symlink as desired.
>
> (Although I really should be using a proper /etc/alternatives instead of
> manually doing the symlink. I'll start doing that.)
>
> But if the guy installs a *binary* named pim, well, then we just can't
> coexist, or my app can no longer by referred to by its generic name, but
> only by it's specific name. Isn't that acceptible? His app will just
> clobber my symlink.
No, it won't clobber the symlink. dpkg will crash out and refuse to
install his package.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: