Re: Does a package name have to match path names?
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 17:51, Brett Cundal wrote:
> Hi mentors,
>
> First, I have an opinion question: I'm maintaining the gnu-smalltalk
> package, and I'm considering splitting it up into several packages (X
> and non-X for starters). If I do so, the resulting packages will have
> rather long names (gnu-smalltalk-common springs to mind). Would it be
> a good idea to rename the package "gst"? It's nice and short, and the
> interpreter executable is called "gst". Is it considered bad form to
> rename a package unless absolutely neccesary? AFAIK, it's not
> technically difficult in a case like this.
>
remember, some people go hunting for packages knowing only the upstream name.
When at all possible it is a good idea to name it whatever they do while
following Debian conventions. As for the name being too long, that is ok,
don't worry about it. We have things like libperl-foo-bar-baz too.
> Secondly, supposing I did rename the package, is it okay to keep
> installing to /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk, /usr/lib/gnu-smalltalk, etc?
> Does the install path have to match the package name
> (i.e. /usr/share/gst)? The previous maintainer moved the default
> installation location (/usr/share/smalltalk) seemingly only to match
> the package name, and I'm curious if that was neccesary. I don't see
> anything indicating that in Policy or the FHS... If I change the
> install directory for whatever reason, could that break anything?
>
again, it is a good idea to mimic the upstream. failing that, yes it is
preferable for the path to match the package name.
Reply to: