Re: port of cdrtools

[Jacob Meuser <jakemsr@jakemsr.com>]

On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:44:21AM -0500, Jolan Luff wrote:
> all of them are required for my use. they all work for me.

What architecture?
 
> as for mkisofs/mkhybrid conflicts...
> 
> how would you like this resolved? i certainly think that a "check your
> path" in MESSAGE is adequate.  renaming the binaries isn't acceptable.

Why not?  We have gmake, gnuls, gtar, moc2, moc3 ...  Yes, most
front-ends are going to look for 'mkisofs'.  But we do have mkisofs
already in the base system, so it's not going to really break
anything.  The front-end will have to be able to specify what
to use as $mkisofs or some such to use a renamed program.  I think
this is a useful feature anyway.  Of course, one could do whatever
one pleases once the package is installed to suit whatever setup one
prefers.

> something needs to be done since the name has changed and the port
> version is now 2 major releases behind what's currently available
> (cdrtools-1.11 was released recently).

Where is this available?

--
<jakemsr@jakemsr.com>