Triple VNC

[Tom McLaughlin]

On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 09:52, Scot Hetzel 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.
> >
> Several ports are already doing this (or have done this in the past). 
> What they did is to change the src Makefile to install the file first
> as bin/vncviewer-tight, then create a symlink to bin/vncviewer, in the
> pkg-install script.
> 
> [ ! -f ${PKG_PREFIX}/bin/vncviewer ] && ln -s
> ${PKG_PREFIX}/bin/vncviewer-tight ${PKG_PREFIX}/bin/vncviewer
> 
> > The second problem I see is which package owns bin/vncviewer?  Both
> 
> The first one installed owns the bin/vncviewer link.
> 
> NOTE: the pkg-deinstall script would have to check where the link
> points, to determine if it should remove the link.  Also if one of the
> other ports are installed, it should create a link from the remaining
> port to bin/vncviewer.
> 
> Scot

But what happens to bin/vncviewer after it's initial owner is removed? 
It is not owned by any package at that point.  Is it acceptable to leave
a file like that even if a package will eventually remove the file? 
Thanks.

Tom