Hi, Too bad it is now very difficult to me to change it in lcms, since older versions would still use such name and there are plenty of RPM around out of my control. Changing the name would break yet existing scripts and would violate one of the basic premises of lcms -- backwards compatibility :( My plan for newer versions is to use a different name 'lcmsicclink' for example, and then add a symbolic link icclink -> lcmsicclink. That would make possible to have both Argyll and lcms installed at same time, with the only drawback of bogus 'icclink' binary target. Regards, Marti Maria. -----Original Message----- From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Graeme Gill Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:29 PM To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Autotools again... Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote: > An additional point is the name conflict with littleCMS about icclink. > Can you make the installation of icclink optional untill the issue > might be solved otherwise (like renaming)? I keep thinking about this, but haven't struck on a good alternative. Simple things like "plink" etc. are already widely used for other tools. "argylllink" is too long winded, "agllink" is too cryptic. Got any suggestions ? (I'd want to change "profile" as well, as it clashes with some system tools). Besides, I got to "icclink" first! :-) > would you consider taking these changes into your package and allow an > double build system? It would help accepting your package for > distributors on Linux. I'm prepared to distribute it, but I'm not prepared to maintain it. Graeme Gill.