Le Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 02:40:16AM +0200, Piotr Ozarowski a écrit : > Charles Plessy wrote: > > I am preparing a package for a software suite called EMBOSS, and one > > of > > its binaries is called emma. Is the Emma you are packaging also > > containing a "emma" binary ? > > Yes, my package has only one file in /usr/bin - "emma". > > I wanted to search for sponsor today, but I will delay it so we can > work on > consensus here... > Are other binaries depending on "emma" name in your package?
Not "depending". However, EMBOSS is a set of command line tools in the unix spirit. Its users would be quite disturbed if emma had to be renamed. Also, I guess that it would break scripts. So let us list the possibilities : a) One of the packages gives up emma to the other. I explained my reasons why I would prefer not giving up the name, but I understand that if you estimate that you also have good ones, we will have to find another solution. b) EMBOSS and Emma packages rename the binary to emma-align and emma-assistant respectively (for instance). This is what policy 10.1 requires when there is no consensus. c) The packages rename the binaries, and we find a way to ship a script as /usr/bin/emma which tells the user to read /usr/share/doc/emboss|emma/README.Debian. Or to read a emma.1 manpage wich explains how to deal with this issue (such as having a symlink to /usr/bin/emma-relevant in $HOME/bin). Using dpkg-divert could be a way to ship this script in both packages. As the policy does not recommend anything like c), I am wondering if it is a good idea. I welcome any comment on this. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy http://charles.plessy.org Wako, Saitama, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
