On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 03:17:52PM +0200, Manuel Prinz wrote: > As a GROMACS user, I'd prefer to keep the name "genbox" since it's one > of the tools in the GROMACS suite that is used quite often and a lot of > my scripts would need an update to work on a name change. I think there > are more people in the same situation.
I agree with Manuel on this point; also, since GROMACS runs are often set up on one machine and then uploaded to a number-crunching cluster somewhere else (which is quite possibly running a different OS entirely), script breakage due to changing the command name is even more likely. #403879 wasn't a problem since that command is nearly unused, but it's the rare GROMACS run that *doesn't* need genbox. However, radiance also ships a large number of files in /usr/bin, which I assume are scriptable too? Is renaming the command likely to cause equivalent problems for your users? -- Nicholas Breen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
