[argyllcms] Re: Autotools again...
- From: Gerhard Fuernkranz <nospam456@xxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 21:44:46 +0200
Yet another heretical idea to resolve any name conflicts might be:
* Place all executables not in /usr/bin,
but in /usr/lib/argyll-0.51a/
* Create a script /usr/bin/argyll, containing
#!/bin/sh
PATH=/usr/lib/argyll-${ARGYLL_VERSION-0.51a}:$PATH
export PATH
exec "$@"
Then the commands could be called as e.g.
"argyll profile ..."
or
"argyll icclink ..."
or
"ARGYLL_VERSION=0.50 argyll cctiff ..."
(to run an older version of the command)
etc.
Regards,
Gerhard
-----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:
