Hello,
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Davide Puricelli wrote:
> I'm asking you help about bug #509367.
As you can imagine similar problems have come-up in the past.
> 2) just putting a Conflicts between mono-devel and chicken-bin,
> but I think it's not a good solution for users.
This is not correct since there is no conflict in the usability
of these two packages on the same system.
> 3) well, mono-devel came second, they introduced the problem and they
> should fix it, renaming their file.
> I prefer the solution #3, but I'm not really impartial, I know, so,
> what do you think?
I agree with this approach.
In the long run, both maintainers must think about how likely it is
that users will call /usr/bin/csc _by_ _name_ ('csc') in each case. If
this is not too likely, then the binary could equally well be located
somewhere else (like /usr/lib/<pkgname>/csc for example).
Regards,
Kapil.
--
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature