On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 1:15 PM Dominik Vogt <dominik.v...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 12:13:45PM -0600, Jaimos Skriletz wrote:
> > Creating two packages that live side by side is a far greater
> > challenge than initially anticipated. First there are a lot of other
> > binaries such as fvwm-root, fvwm-config, fvwm-menu-desktop, that would
> > conflict,
>
> Do these not get the --program-suffix? If not, that should be
> fixed.
>
It does work for the binaries. Just not the module manpages, which
share a common location, $PREFIX/man/man1
> > and though the --program-{prefix,suffix,transform-name} can
> > rename the binaries, this isn't the only conflict. The manpages for
> > all the common modules conflict and so does the translations/locales.
> > And none of these are affected by the --program-foo options.
>
> All right, but if these problems had been *reported* and not just
> silently dealt with in the distribution, they would have been
> fixed immediately back when the change from fvwm2 to fvwm was
> done.
>
I just adopted the package as it was, so I was unaware of this issue
until now. And the package only renames a single binary fvwm -> fvwm2
(then creates a link for fvwm), so at the time it wasn't an issue, as
it appears these other binaires were not part of fvwm 1.x.
The rest is all done in the fvwm1 package to ensure no conflict, which
someone else maintains. I did a little more research, the fvwm1
package in debian just renames all the manpages FvwmFoo.1.gz ->
FvwmFoo1.1.gz. This was probably done by Debian since at the time fvwm
1.x was no longer supported.
> > and locales,
>
> I don't know much about locales, but are they not installed in
> /usr/share/fvwm<program-suffix>?
>
Locales are placed in $PREFIX/share/locale/<lang>/LC_MESSAGES/, fvwm
has both a fvwm.mo and FvwmScript.mo that get placed in multiple
languages. I only know that the files are there and conflict, unsure
of if they can be renamed or any issues that would arise from that.
> > but even this isn't doable since there is
> > already differences in the modules in fvwm2 and fvwm3, mostly it is
> > the modules that are available, but FvwmPager has already received
> > some changes in options for the RandR per monitor setup.
>
> Is is acceptable to have man pages named
> FvwmModule<program-suffix> in addition to the default names?
> If all else fails, the manpages could be put in separate packages.
>
As mentioned above, that appears to be what Debian's fvwm1 package is
doing. So it would be acceptable (only issue I can see is confusion on
the user if man FvwmButtons either didn't give a man page or a version
they weren't expecting, but the docs can explain this convention).
> > Currently, I'm just gonna to go with fvwm3 conflicts with fvwm2 and
> > only one of those can be installed at a time.
>
> I don't like this naming scheme that suggest the version number is
> part of the project name. Is naming them "fvwm", "fvwm-2",
> "fvwm-1" not an option?
>
It is an option, but it isn't how it is done now. Currently Debian has
two packages fvwm1 and fvwm. It seems to vary, some packages are
packagename-<ver>, and others are packagename<ver> to allow multiple
versions to be installed via multiple packages. I was just thinking of
being in line of what is currently in place.
jaimos
> Ciao
>
> Dominik ^_^ ^_^
>
> --
>
> Dominik Vogt
>
