Re: No reasonable solution
Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote:
Hello,
Regarding conflicts like that between "slang-slirp" and "slirp".
(see recent bugs filed by Michael Ablassmeier <abi@grinser.de>
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=abi@grinser.de
).
I feel that this a currently an area not addressed by policy
sufficiently well.
Assume that:
1. There are substantial sized communities within and outside Debian that
for each of the binaries named "/usr/bin/slirp" (which provide
entirely different functions).
2. That it is quite possible for someone to want the functionality of
both programs on one installation. (For example, for different users
of one system).
In such a situation it would be incorrect to insist that one of the
packages use a binary with a different name---because of (1).
So what's wrong with insisting both of them changing the name?
It would also be incorrect to use "Conflicts:"---because of (2).
Correct
Currently, the only available solution is to use "alternatives". I
know that this is not considered to be the correct use of alternatives
which is meant to address different programs providing the same
functionality. However, this is an alternative use (sorry couldn't
resist :)) of alternatives. Perhaps we could use a different
namespace like "choices" instead of "alternatives" as a way of
distinguishing the objectives. The actual mechanisms could be similar
(or even identical) to that of "alternatives".
No, that's no solution because later on some package might provide a
slirp binary which would be a real alternative...
Cheers
Luk
Reply to: