tmclaugh at sdf.lonestar.org
Mon Jul 12 18:37:56 PDT 2004
On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 12:09, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
> "Tom McLaughlin" <tmclaugh at sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 17:04, Bruno Czekay wrote:
> > The first problem I see is you install the tightvnc package and it
> > creates bin/vncviewer which is a symlink to bin/vncviewer-tight and then
> > you install realvnc. I believe that if you overwrite the existing
> > symlink you will overwrite the symlink target. So by installing
> > realvnc's bin/vncviewer you will overwrite tightvnc's
> > bin/vncviewer-tight. I haven't tried this with any ports, simply
> > copying files around and copying to the symlink overwrote the target
> > file.
> a well done package could easily handle this issue by first removing the
> symlink and by installing its own one. a better way would be to install
> all of them using a separate name and to have a separate startup script
> for each of them w/ separate startup variables for the server side, and
> to have a wrapper for the client side as for mozilla.
Okay, would the wrapper script then be bin/vncviewer? Which package
owns the script and what happens if the owner package is removed, how
does that affect the other vnc versions installed?
Personally I tend to be leery of anything fancy in ports to make them
play nice with others. That's my bias there. Thanks. :)
> Cyrille Lefevre.
More information about the freebsd-ports