Ivan Zhakov wrote on Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 14:48:04 +0300: > On 10 February 2015 at 14:07, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > > Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 18:46:51 +0100: > >> Con: > >> - some people have seen the tool and may have used it > >> with its current name > >> > >> Neutral: > >> * renames have happened in the past (e.g. mucc -> svnmucc) > > > > For svnmucc, we add a symlink from the old location in Makefile.in: > > > > if test "$(DESTDIR)$(bindir)" != "$(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)"; then \ > > ln -sf $(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT) > > $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \ > > fi > > > > So you could do something similar for this rename. > I think that distro packagers who made unofficially released tool part > of they package could do this, but we should not add a symlink in > Subversion core.
In 1.8, 'make install-tools' installs svn-bench. In 1.9, 'make install' will install svnbench. If 1.9 'make install-tools' doesn't create svn-bench as a symlink to svnbench, then we'll have broken compatibility for users of that makefile target. Therefore 'make install-tools' should create the symlink. The symlink won't be part of the core 'make install'. Makes sense? That's exactly what we do for svnmucc — the Makefile.in code I quoted is run by the 'install-tools' target, which used to install svnmucc into $(toolsdir)/svnmucc. Daniel
