Re: Many executables across Debian's archives share basenames
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 09:24:11AM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> Now "import" is quite another kettle of fish: it's part of the
> >> ImageMagick suite (not much to do with X, actually), which has the
> >> (questionable) tradition of calling its things "display", "convert",
> >> "identify", "compare"... or even "conjure"). Now ImageMagick is so
> >> useful that people seem to tolerate it, but a prefix (e.g. "im-")
> >> or a super-command ("im") would be more modern, yes.
> > ImageMagick only gets away with it because of its age and ubiquity.
> > It's grandfathered in.
> How 'bout installing imagemagick executables into
> a /usr/bin/im/ subdirectory?
> This way, you can refer to it via `im/convert` but if you prefer to
> use the "grandfather" name, you can just add /usr/bin/im/ to your PATH.
The problem with grandparents is that everyone has to agree. Just imagine
a distro doing that. Torches and pitchforks! ;-)
(And while we're painting the shed, I'd go for a /usr/bin/im.d, with a
dispatcher script in /usr/bin/im or something...)
Of course, a sysadmin could do that on her box...
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----