| 1 |
Isn't this the same problem as gcc, java interpreters, etc all wanting |
| 2 |
to install binaries called 'gcc' and 'java', so we have gcc-config and |
| 3 |
java-config which allows the user to insert the 'gcc' and 'java' |
| 4 |
symbols into their executable namespace? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:45:39 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> Say we have a group of packages. For the sake of argument, we'll call |
| 8 |
> them 'vim', 'nvi', 'elvis' and 'vi'. Each of these packages provides a |
| 9 |
> binary with the same name as the package. So far no problem... |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Now let's say that each of these packages were clones or derivatives of |
| 12 |
> a traditional unix package, which provided binaries named 'vi', 'view' |
| 13 |
> and 'ex'. A user installing any one of these packages would expect to be |
| 14 |
> given convenience symlinks which would allow them to access the packages |
| 15 |
> via the traditional names. Suddenly we have a problem -- what if a user |
| 16 |
> has more than one of these packages installed? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Oh, and to make it even more fun we'll say that certain non-Linux |
| 19 |
> systems already provide a binary with the traditional name... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives