Re: Binary executable name conflicts with existing package
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:26 AM, Balasankar C <balasankarc@autistici.org> wrote:
> Hi,
> One of the gems I packaged recently (rexical) ships a binary executable
> named 'rex'. But there is already a package by perl team named 'rex' which
> also ships a binary of the same name.
> This resulted in the bug #788294.
>
> What is the correct procedure to follow?
Debian policy 10.1 https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html
Two different packages must not install programs with different
functionality but with the same filenames. (The case of two programs
having the same functionality but different implementations is handled
via "alternatives" or the "Conflicts" mechanism. See Maintainer
Scripts, Section 3.9 and Conflicting binary packages - Conflicts,
Section 7.4 respectively.) If this case happens, one of the programs
must be renamed. The maintainers should report this to the
debian-devel mailing list and try to find a consensus about which
program will have to be renamed. If a consensus cannot be reached,
both programs must be renamed.
> Renaming the binary (but the users
> may refer to upstream readme and want rex itself) or declaring a conflict
> relationship between the packages (but the file they ship are "same" not in
> the sense of content but only in the sense of name) ?
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
Liberty equality fraternity or death,
Shawn Landden
ChurchOfGit.com
Reply to: