Re: Proposal to avoid executable naming conflicts (was: Bug#753704: ITP: amap -- Next-generation scanning tool for pentesters)

2014-07-08 Thread Paul Tagliamonte
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 03:57:20PM -0400, Eric Cooper wrote: > On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 06:57:02AM +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 11:31:12AM -0400, Eric Cooper wrote: > > > Since Debian package names must already be unique, we ought to be able > > > to leverage that to avo

Re: Proposal to avoid executable naming conflicts (was: Bug#753704: ITP: amap -- Next-generation scanning tool for pentesters)

2014-07-08 Thread Eric Cooper
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 06:57:02AM +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 11:31:12AM -0400, Eric Cooper wrote: > > Since Debian package names must already be unique, we ought to be able > > to leverage that to avoid having to fight over which package gets to > > claim which binary

Re: Proposal to avoid executable naming conflicts (was: Bug#753704: ITP: amap -- Next-generation scanning tool for pentesters)

2014-07-08 Thread Chris Bannister
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 11:31:12AM -0400, Eric Cooper wrote: > Since Debian package names must already be unique, we ought to be able > to leverage that to avoid having to fight over which package gets to > claim which binary name. > > What about making it into a user's install-time decision, > ra

Re: Proposal to avoid executable naming conflicts

2014-07-08 Thread Russ Allbery
Josselin Mouette writes: > Le mardi 08 juillet 2014 à 11:31 -0400, Eric Cooper a écrit : >> Since Debian package names must already be unique, we ought to be able >> to leverage that to avoid having to fight over which package gets to >> claim which binary name. >> >> What about making it into

Re: Proposal to avoid executable naming conflicts (was: Bug#753704: ITP: amap -- Next-generation scanning tool for pentesters)

2014-07-08 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le mardi 08 juillet 2014 à 11:31 -0400, Eric Cooper a écrit : > Since Debian package names must already be unique, we ought to be able > to leverage that to avoid having to fight over which package gets to > claim which binary name. > > What about making it into a user's install-time decision, >

Re: Proposal to avoid executable naming conflicts (was: Bug#753704: ITP: amap -- Next-generation scanning tool for pentesters)

2014-07-08 Thread Jérémy Lal
Le mardi 08 juillet 2014 à 09:04 -0700, Don Armstrong a écrit : > On Tue, 08 Jul 2014, Eric Cooper wrote: > > What about making it into a user's install-time decision, rather than > > a developer's packaging-time decision? > > Any user who wants to can override the rename by using dpkg-divert. Bu

Re: Proposal to avoid executable naming conflicts (was: Bug#753704: ITP: amap -- Next-generation scanning tool for pentesters)

2014-07-08 Thread Don Armstrong
On Tue, 08 Jul 2014, Eric Cooper wrote: > What about making it into a user's install-time decision, rather than > a developer's packaging-time decision? Any user who wants to can override the rename by using dpkg-divert. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com We were