[OpenAFS] Naming of "backup" and "up" commands
Mon, 23 Sep 2013 12:05:08 +0200
my answer is "YES" - we use this commands and "YES" renaming 'd be fine.
If no compat-packages gets provided I'd write/expand my own 'afs-fixit'
I'd prefer to see the 'afs' prefix rather than a suffix.
I think this makes things more easy especially for new people.
(type 'afs' and double press TAB to get things back mind)
Imho this is also much closer to the command suit idea of afs.
Have a good day
On So, 2013-09-22 at 21:10 -0400, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> I would like to hear from sites that actively use these commands.
> That said my personal opinion is that they should be renamed in the next
> major release. (Not 1.6.x).
> I have no objection to separate packaging.
> Jeffrey Altman
> On 9/22/2013 8:51 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > In the Debian packaging for OpenAFS, I've renamed the "up" command to
> > "afs-up" for years now. There's now also a conflict with the "backup"
> > command (which is a horrible name for a command), and I'm rather tempted
> > to do the same thing, but since it's a whole command suite with multiple
> > documentation pages and cross-references, it's more of an undertaking.
> > What would people think if I submitted a patch to OpenAFS to rename up to
> > afs-up and backup to afs-backup? Would that break a bunch of critical
> > software? It would be really nice to fix AFS's camping on obvious
> > namespace.
> > Failing that, I'm probably going to split butc, backup, and fms into a
> > separate package to make it easier for other packages to conflict with it
> > due to the poorly-chosen command name instead of conflicting with all of
> > openafs-client.
Kommunikations-, Informations- und Medienzentrum (630)
IT-Dienste | Abt. IT-Infrastruktur (ITI)
Raum 04.24/227 Schloss Westhof-Sued | 70599 Stuttgart
Tel. + 49 711 459 23949 | Fax + 49 711 459 23449