This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: New package: makeself-2.1.5-2

Eric Blake wrote:

> On 04/28/2010 12:12 PM, Sastre wrote:

>>> 2010/4/28, Lee D. Rothstein
>>> FWIW, the man page says makeself, not

I actually didn't say that, but I alluded to it.

>> Fair enough.
>> Two options, then:
>> -patching the manpage
>> -patching the source and the cygport
>> None of them involve too much work. So now I would like to know (from
>> some authoritative source :)) if a there is a guideline, an unspoken agreement,
>> or a good practice defined regarding the extension of non-binary executables
>> under /usr/bin.
> Perhaps unspoken, but I prefer suffix-less executables. Then I don't
> have to care whether they are binary or interpreted scripts. Besides,
> having a suffix makes it harder to reimplement in a different language
> (for example, suppose someone decided to rewrite makeself in C, python,
> or perl, instead of sh). So following debian practice of stripping the
> .sh suffix as part of the packaging effort seems reasonable (and in the
> meantime, perhaps you may also want to report this upstream as a bug
> they might want to fix).

First some important medical information:

 Suffixes cause cancer in dogs learning to play the piano. A lot
 of the contributors, here, apparently, have such pets. ;-)

Now, my opinion:

 Amen, to what Erick Blake said. No suffixes, please. Debian has
 it right.

-- Problem reports: FAQ: Documentation: Unsubscribe info:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]