Re: --program-suffix

[Pavel Janík]

   From: Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
   Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:03:36 -0700 (MST)

   >     We link emacs to emacs-${version}. What will end in ${prefix}/bin?
   >     GNUecams21 linked to GNUecams21-${version}? GNUecams21 linked to
   >     emacs-${version}?
   > 
   > I am not sure about that one.  Perhaps it is better to transform both
   > names.

So is GNUecams21 linked to GNUecams21-${version} the one I should
implement? It is really weird, because I have
specified --program-suffix=21, but this program will not end on 21. On the
other hand, GNUecams-${version}-21 is even more weird... So it is on you to
decide which one of these possibilities.

I have my own opinion: remove this link at all and have only one
GNUecams21. Is there any reason to still have this link?

   > No, because they are not installed in the user's PATH; they are
   > private command names, in effect.  Some are run from Lisp code or from
   > makefiles.  Not renaming them means we don't have the problem of
   > changing this Lisp code and the makefiles.

OK, I will apply these to all programs which are installed to bin/ and will
not apply them to programs which should be installed into
exec-directory. Is that the right thing?
-- 
Pavel Janík

Proving me wrong is always a good sport ;)
                  -- Linus Torvalds in linux-kernel