On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 08:34 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Callum Lerwick <seg <at> haxxed.com> writes: > > Wouldn't work. You'd either have one package with a mess of dangling > > symlinks, or you'd need a symlink package per main package which would > > be as much or more work than just putting it in the main package to > > begin with. > > That's why Les said "if the target executable doesn't exist you aren't any > worse off with the symlink than without". Now that's a statement one can agree > or disagree with. I for one think having stuff in /usr/bin which points nowhere > is broken and it could actually make tab completion even less useful than the > status quo (depending on how smart the tab completion is with respect to broken > symlinks). So I think that, while this wasn't necessarily a bad idea in > principle, in practice (as you say) it won't work. Well I was thinking more in terms of violating packaging guidelines. rpmlint complains loudly about dangling symlinks. It could very well *technically* work.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
