Re: Help to clarify an issue
Em 01-01-2018 10:56, The Wanderer escreveu:
> On 2018-01-01 at 05:48, Herbert Fortes wrote:
>
>>
>>> Well said, I agree 100%.
>>>
>>> I consider both parties to be wrong here:
>>> * Jonathan went very hasty on the NMU
>>> * Herbert refuses a patch for a quite annoying thing, fixing which requires
>>> no effort on his side (as the submitter did all the work), without
>>> providing any rationale
>>>
>>> It's a clear bug to me: the package behaves in a different way based on
>>> whether an unrelated doodad (some X stuff) is installed or not. That breaks
>>> people's muscle memory, requiring user's effort for every single machine the
>>> package is installed on -- or, on every invocation, thinking "is this shell
>>> on a GUI machine?". And I for one ssh to my home desktop a lot.
>>>
>>> "because one does not want to press tab" is a ridiculous explanation.
>>>
>>> Thus, Herbert: could you please tell us if you have any reason to reject the
>>> fix, other than being annoyed with a NMU done in a wrong way?
>>
>> It seems more ridiculous to me do not want to use an alias.
>
> Adding an alias locally only fixes the problem locally, for one machine,
> or even one person on one machine. (And - as mentioned in the bug
> comments - if you're trying to share the same bashrc across multiple
> machines, some of which have only duc and some of which have duc-nox, a
> simple alias definition will not suffice; you'd need to write
> conditional logic to determine which alias to define.)
>
> Diverting the installed binary to a non-conflicting name and defining an
> alternative locally would avoid the latter problem, but it seems
> fragile, and again only fixes the problem for one machine.
>
> Defining an alternative in the package, or (less optimally) having both
> packages provide the same binary name with appropriate Conflicts:, fixes
> the problem for everyone who uses the package - with relatively minimal
> effort, and as far as I can see, zero undesirable side effects.
>
It is impossible that someone has both - duc and duc-nox - installed ?
Reply to: