[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#389163: How to handle filename conflict "aleph" (Packages aleph, tetex-bin, texlive-bin)?

From Paul's comments, it seems to me that there is no need for the
current Aleph it's been replaced, and it's three years old.  I have no
opinion about whether it ought to be dropped from Debian.

Paul also explains that AFNIX replaced Aleph, and should not be thought
of as just a new version with a name change.  I had misunderstood.
Given his explanation, we should think of AFNIX and Alpha as two
different entities I think.

That means that Paul should continue with AFNIX, I think, and continue
learning; there isn't any hue and cry I know of asking for AFNIX to be
in Debian right away, so I see no reason he shouldn't just continue as
he has been.

This however does not solve the name clash with Aleph.  So I think there
are three possibilities (repeating here what Frank already said

1) Leave things alone, and ignore the problem.  This, it seems to me,
requires some kind of go-ahead from the release team.

2) Drop aleph.  This would be warranted if it were of no use any longer,
or if it were buggy.  But the *only* bug against Aleph is the name clash
with TeX, so there is no independent reason to prefer this solution.
The question remains, however, whether the current version has any use,
and I simply don't know the answer to that.  If it does, then, as I
said, I'm happy to maintain it.

3) Retain aleph, and change the name of the binary in one package or the
other.  If we don't do (2), and the release team is not happy with (1),
then this is obviously the right course.  I don't care at all which
program's name is changed or what it's changed to.  What are the pros
and cons?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: