Hi there! On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 22:19:26 +0100, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > On Wed, 02 Nov 2011, Roger Leigh wrote: >> When considering the divide between "internal use" and "for users", >> consider that if it's for users to invoke then it should simply be >> in the default path. It's not typical to need to add special >> directories to one's path, and it's certainly not encouraged or >> recommended. > > Well -- that is all cool and in an ideal world I am with you on this > one. BUT it is often the case (e.g. with scientific software) that > suite provide bulk of (>100) cmdline tools. Some of those come without > unique names and are already widely used by people running Debian or > whatnot, so changing their habbits/scripts is not as easy as "lets just > renamed them". Sure thing we recommend upstream either coming up with > custom prefixes/unique names or gateway wrappers to avoid conflicts > and/or reduce hit on the proliferation of namespace of cmdline tools... > But once again -- it ain't happening at once and for all, so let's > not discuss this aspect further here. Exactly, discussion about this practice (which, BTW, is coded in Policy), was at: <http://bugs.debian.org/190753> Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca PS, I am researcher in biology and hate this practice of providing bulk of cmdline tools with generic name: <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=642986#10>
Attachment:
pgpuAUhwyy3EI.pgp
Description: PGP signature