On Sat, 8 Sep 2012, Ulrich Dangel wrote:
* Willi Mann wrote [17.06.12 12:34]:
Any progress on this? This should be a rather simple issue.
My recommendation is to rename the binary of dconf. Maybe the binaries
name could be changed to confdumper?
I think this would be a great proposal but from the Debian Policy:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html
,----
| Two different packages must not install programs with different functionality
| but with the same filenames. (The case of two programs having the same
| functionality but different implementations is handled via "alternatives" or
| the "Conflicts" mechanism. See Maintainer Scripts, Section 3.9 and Conflicting
| binary packages - Conflicts, Section 7.4 respectively.) If this case happens,
| one of the programs must be renamed. The maintainers should report this to the
| debian-devel mailing list and try to find a consensus about which program will
| have to be renamed. If a consensus cannot be reached, both programs must be
| renamed.
`----
I am not sure what happens when the maintainer does not react but maybe
the package should get removed
What I hate is the fact that dconf predates Gnome's project, and they
went forward with the name anyway even though they knew about the name
conflict. (There's a blog post from Philip Van Hoof where during the
design phase he noted that the name dconf was already taken). I asked them
to use another name.
--
-- dag wieers, d...@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/
-- dagit linux solutions, i...@dagit.net, http://dagit.net/
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
