On 7/22/16, 12:57 PM, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>On 22/07/2016 19:58, Bill Zissimopoulos wrote: >>> winfsp-fuse is a reasonable name. >>> dokan-fuse also (IMHO) >> >> In the interest of moving things forward, I am happy to rename the >> package. Is it possible for a package with a name winfsp-fuse to >>satisfy a >> “fuse” dependency? > >It is not clear to me what you mean. > >If some package depends on winfsp-fuse, the dependency will be >winfsp-fuse. > >winfsp-fuse will require the external package winfsp. My apologies for not making it clearer. What I meant to say is this: Suppose I have a package XYZ that requires FUSE. Is it possible that the “FUSE” dependency can be satisfied by either winfsp-fuse or dokan-fuse? If that is not possible it looks like we would have to have winfsp-sshfs or dokan-sshfs, etc. which IMO is less desirable. Bill