On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:33:10AM +0200, Steffen Moeller wrote: > thank you for your pointer. I'll send an update, hopefully > that is then just easily put into the release, that will > conflict with the putty package. To have the binary > renamed would render Debian incompatible with all those > scripts distributed in the community that use that tool.
Ok, that is a very good reason not to rename your plink. > Being a user of putty under windows myself, I see plink > for expert use only. Maybe we could eventually separate > putty plink from the putty package. However, the number of > installations that install both putty and plink will be > rather minimal, so we should not bother too much. > > Would that be acceptable to you? Sure. Perhaps the putty package should rename plink to putty-plink or similar. In these kind-of situations it seems to me that there is no clear rule on what should happen - "oldest stays" does not seem like a sensible idea (I think the epiphany package should be renamed epiphany-game, for example, but the maintainer clearly disagrees) Just to be clear, I noticed the collision but I don't actually use putty-tools myself :) It seems it might disappear as part of removing gtk #1 packages in the future. -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]