* Darren Kenny <Darren.Kenny at sun.com> [2006-05-03 03:29]: > In the case of existing g-prefixed utils, I think it would make sense to > have the "non-prefixed" version in /usr/gnu. The g-prefix isn't > compatible with many configure scripts and it ends up that quite often > the GNU equivalent simply isn't found. If the /usr/gnu could be added to > the front of a user's path (if they desire of course) then such scripts > can be used without complexity. That is, in essence, what the proposal is attempting to say. Perhaps it isn't saying so clearly enough?
> To implement this I would propose that the /usr/bin/gXXXX be a hard-link > to /usr/gnu/bin/XXXX Actually, to be consistent with other link relationships, the /usr/gnu/bin utilities, when conflicting, should involve symbolic links to the g-prefixed version. The links into and out of /usr/bin appear to point in all directions, so we'll need to actually decide what's best when we're actually integrating a specific command. (I was eventually planning to integrate GNU which, which is on no one's list, but seemed like an easy use case to work through.) > So what happens to the existing /usr/sfw tools that conflict here - can > it be presumed that they will be decomissioned in preference for the > /usr/gnu equivalent? Just seems to make sense to me... Over time, yes. It depends on the stabilities in the specific cases--for greater stability, a link will need to be preserved for some number of some "size" of release. Thanks Stephen
