Re: Virtual packages (was Re: Bug#64006:)
On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2000 at 01:02:26PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > There are still several scripts in Debian which depend on /usr/bin/nawk.
> > All of them should work with /usr/bin/awk.
>
> So I guess we should require them to be /usr/bin/awk.
Yes, that's the least I think we should do.
> > > Is there any harm in requiring there to be a nawk -> awk symlink?
> >
> > That would make /usr/bin/nawk essential (because awk itself is), which
> > (IMHO) would be the wrong thing to do.
>
> Why?
Since every invocation of /usr/bin/nawk may be replaced by an
equivalent invocation of /usr/bin/awk, it follows that a Debian system
does not absolutely need /usr/bin/nawk to work (I mean, the same way
it needs every package being Essential: yes), hence it does not make
much sense to make it essential.
> > The real question is: Is there any harm in requiring awk scripts to
> > use /usr/bin/awk as a common interface?
>
> Not for Debian packages. Yes for locally installed software.
Maybe, but locally installed software using /bin/perl or /usr/spool
had already to be changed and nobody thought this was a good reason
to keep /bin/perl or /usr/spool.
Reply to: