On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 17:13, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: > Hi, > > we are going to be forced to change epiphany executable name because > it conflicts with an older project distributed in debian. > See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=196491 for details. > > Someone proposed, while we are at it, to rename to gnome-web-browser. > Has anyone problems with it ? Assuming it's ok to do it, would be better > to use a symlink (and to rename the real executable to epiphany-browser > to avoid the conflict) or to rename the real executable directly ? > Hi, I think it's better to rename Epiphany (the game) into epiphany-game. Why not? I think the epiphany (game) maintainer could accept this path with no problem. The impact to renaming Epiphany (browser) is higher than renaming ephiphany (game) related to the system. In general I think that will be better having epiphany renamed to gnome-web-browser but now it's not so easy due to the fact that epiphany is the standard gnome web browser. In my opinion a softlink to gnome-web-browser executable will be the best.In that case we start to have immediatly a new package renamed with the right package/executable name. bye, Luca Cappelletti -- The Mutant Has Begun Linux Registered User: #223411 http://www.verticalmindsystem.com:8085/Blog/Mutek/index_html http://www.advogato.org/person/mutek/ http://persone.softwarelibero.org/person/mutek
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part