No, I think using conflicts here is wrong. See https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s-binaries
On 07/08/25 11:14 pm, Johan Walles wrote: > How about marking moar and the other package as Conflicts with each other? > > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#conflicting-binary-packages-conflicts > > "Conflicts should be used when two packages provide the same file and will > continue to do so," > > I would guess the number of people who want both should be a small group... > > Since moar has been out longer than moarvm and has more users, I think not > having moar in Debian would be unfortunate. > > Regards /Johan > > Den tors 7 aug. 2025 kl 19:13 skrev Guillem Jover <[email protected]>: > >> Hi! >> >> On Thu, 2025-08-07 at 12:09:55 -0400, Stephen Gelman wrote: >>> On Aug 7, 2025 at 8:34:21 AM, Johan Walles <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>> Would you please consider packaging the moar pager (written in Go >>>> obviously)? >>>> >>>> It has 800+ stars on GitHub: >>>> https://github.com/walles/moar/ >>>> >>>> There's an RFP open: >>>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=944035 >>>> >>>> Is this something you think you could take on? >> >>> Sure, I’d be happy to take this on. It looks pretty straightforward, but >>> I’ll let you know if I run into any issues. >> >> Unfortunately this project would conflict with the already present >> package moarvm, which also provides /usr/bin/moar. >> >> I'm afraid this new package would need its program to be renamed to be >> accepted into Debian (I guess ideally both the project and program name), >> which can be a tall ask for a project that has existed for a while. :/ >> >> (Alternatively you could try to convince the upstream moarvm project >> to rename their binary and shared library to moarvm, but unless that >> happens, the moar program name should not be used by any other package >> with a different functionality/interface.) >> >> Thanks, >> Guillem >> >
