[argyllcms] Re: Autotools again...

  • From: "Maria, Marti" <marti.maria@xxxxxx>
  • To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:52:50 +0200

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.


Other related posts: