[Debian-med-packaging] RFS: codonw

[Sascha Steinbiss]

Hi Andreas, 

>>> To avoid conflicts with five packages we need to move the tools to
>>> /usr/lib/codonw and provide a wrapper script (as an example see the
>>> phylip package).
>> 
>> Well, these ‘tools’ are only symlinks to the main executable causing it to behave differently when called via the link. The functionality is also available using command line switches in the main codonw executable. Do you think it would be acceptable to drop or rename (e.g. codonw-cai, codonw-tidy, etc.) the linked tools? This would be my preference but could probably break existing third party scripts.
> 
> IMHO the most flexible idea is to move these to
> 
>   /usr/lib/codonw

What are ‘these’ in this case? The symlinks to the only binary produced (codonw)?

> *and* provide the /usr/bin/codonw-* files as links.  This might require
> a certain amount of patching in the code but should be doable.

So you are thinking of links to links? Or should both the links in /usr/bin and /usr/lib/codonw link to the /usr/bin/codonw executable? Certainly doable but I am wondering about the reason for the extra layer of indirection if you meant the first case.

>>> I think upstream (if active currently) should made be
>>> aware about this conflict.
>> 
>> I can contact them and bring it up.
> 
> May be you could find a sensible solution together with upstream.

I have just contacted them but the original email address is invalid. Let me see if I can contact them another way.

Cheers
Sascha