Re: Again: Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools
Andreas Tille wrote:
> in October last year there was a longish discussion about name space
> pollution regarding plink. If you like to spend some time you should
> read the complete log of #503367 .
> I decided to put an end now on this issue to make sure it will
> not remain as is for ever and renamed the entry in /usr/bin.
> This is explained in README.Debian of this package (see svn).
> Two questions are left on my side:
> 1. On the one hand plink upstream claimed on their website that
> Debian *has* renamed plink to snplink (which is not really true
> because the discussion ended without any real action). But Gentoo
> went the same road to "follow" Debian.
> So there is one established way which is accepted upstream to
> handle this problem.
> On the other hand there is this other biological project which
> has a snplink as well. While chances are not really high
> that this software will also be packaged - you can not know.
What about using /usr/bin/PLINK? I can't find a requirement in the
policy to use lowercase characters for a binary/script. Maybe I missed
> So what is better: Just seeking for another name which hopefully
> is singular and asking upstream as well as Gentoo to change as
> well or live with the small risk to run the same circle of name
> space pollution in case the other snplink will be packaged?
> 2. Is the information that plink was renamed to snplink visible
> enough or should I rather use a debconf note to make users really
> aware what they have to do?
Well, a NEWS entry is mandatory in this situation. I would further
suggest to put this information into the package description too and
of course leave an entry in README.Debian.
Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01