[desktop-discuss] Proposing /usr/gnu, 3

[Stephen Hahn]

* Darren Kenny <Darren.Kenny at sun.com> [2006-05-03 03:29]:
> In the case of existing g-prefixed utils, I think it would make sense to 
> have the "non-prefixed" version in /usr/gnu. The g-prefix isn't 
> compatible with many configure scripts and it ends up that quite often 
> the GNU equivalent simply isn't found. If the /usr/gnu could be added to 
> the front of a user's path (if they desire of course) then such scripts 
> can be used without complexity.
 
  That is, in essence, what the proposal is attempting to say.  Perhaps
  it isn't saying so clearly enough?

> To implement this I would propose that the /usr/bin/gXXXX be a hard-link 
> to /usr/gnu/bin/XXXX

  Actually, to be consistent with other link relationships, the
  /usr/gnu/bin utilities, when conflicting, should involve symbolic links to
  the g-prefixed version.  The links into and out of /usr/bin appear to
  point in all directions, so we'll need to actually decide what's best
  when we're actually integrating a specific command.

  (I was eventually planning to integrate GNU which, which is on no
  one's list, but seemed like an easy use case to work through.)

> So what happens to the existing /usr/sfw tools that conflict here - can 
> it be presumed that they will be decomissioned in preference for the 
> /usr/gnu equivalent? Just seems to make sense to me...
 
  Over time, yes.  It depends on the stabilities in the specific
  cases--for greater stability, a link will need to be preserved for
  some number of some "size" of release.

  Thanks
  Stephen