On 6/12/24 09:35, Will McDonald wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 at 21:29, Stephen Morris <steve.morris.au@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I might be skating on thin ice here, but here goes, as a developer, and the way I write programs to the level of user friendliness required where I work, in my view what is happening is badly written code, to use terminology that is common where I work, it should not be producing the extra guf that is incidental to what it has been asked to do, which is delete dangling symlinks.
I don't think you're on thin ice, but software works the way it works.
This list is for the Fedora distro. The Fedora distro is a collection of lots of upstream projects, packaged in a specific way. The project will have a degree of influence in certain behaviours or package selections, but probably not at the level of granularity where someone thinking a specific binary should behave differently will change things?
The symlinks package itself looks pretty moribund.
[wmcdonald@fedora ~ ]$ rpm -qf `which symlinks`
symlinks-1.7-10.fc40.x86_64
[wmcdonald@fedora ~ ]$ rpm -qi symlinks
Name : symlinks
Packager : Fedora Project
Vendor : Fedora Project
URL : http://ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/utils/file/
Bug URL : https://bugz.fedoraproject.org/symlinks
<some output snipped>
[wmcdonald@fedora ~ ]$ rpm -q --changelog symlinks
* Sat Jan 27 2024 Fedora Release Engineering <releng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 1.7-10
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Mass_Rebuild
* Sat Jul 22 2023 Fedora Release Engineering <releng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 1.7-9
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild
* Sat Jan 21 2023 Fedora Release Engineering <releng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 1.7-8
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild
* Sat Jul 23 2022 Fedora Release Engineering <releng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 1.7-7
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Mass_Rebuild
The archive it appears to be packaged from states https://www.ibiblio.org/software/linux/
I guess, as a developer, if you wanted to improve it, you could move the archive sources to an active repo, start improving it with what you want and petition to see if it could be actively updated again? (I have zero idea of the politics behind this, but it's open source software.)
Thanks Will, I could do that. I did actually try doing that with openoffice to expand the functionality of its excel equivalent once but found that their required testing regime was horrendous so I just gave up.
regards,
Steve
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0x1EBE7C07B0F7242C.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
