5 ms·

Small pet peeve of mine: The package name is `deep-daze` but the executable is called `imagine`. This bothers me. More than it should. Imagemagick used to do

by otikik 6y ago

Small pet peeve of mine: The package name is `deep-daze` but the executable is called `imagine`. This bothers me. More than it should. Imagemagick used to do the same thing - but they judiciously renamed their `convert` executable to `magick`. Still not perfect, but an improvement. If your package introduces one command-line executable, it should always be called the same as your package.

Blikkentrekker 6y ago
I disagree with that. The primary command line executable provided by systemd is systemctl, this is an apt name to interface with and control the system daemon, which is an executable it also provides, but not one that is intended to be directly invoked from the command daemon. ImageMagick is also far more than the command line utility that it provides to interface with it's library. Say that it had been written by a third party, but did the same thing using the ImageMagick library as a dependency, would it then be fine for it to have a different name?
seiferteric 6y ago
This was a big pet peeve of mine early in my linux usage as well (still is really). Especially since it is not exactly straight forward to figure out what binaries get installed when you install a package. Almost feels like there should be some namespacing like pkg_name->cmd_name so you can at least tab complete package binaries easily.
- EnigmaCurry 6y ago
  Arch makes it pretty easy to recall: # Who owns binary? pacman -Qo /bin/ls # What files come with package? pacman -Ql coreutils | grep ......
  - seiferteric 6y ago
    Yes debian has the same types of things, but maybe spread across a few commands. I actually just prototyped what I am thinking here https://github.com/seiferteric/pkg_namespace https://github.com/seiferteric/pkg_namespace if anyone is interested.
    - anoncake 6y ago
      It's just `apt-file search /path/to/file` actually. I think there's a dpkg command that is limited to installed packages as well.

by otikik 6y ago

Blikkentrekker 6y ago

I disagree with that. The primary command line executable provided by systemd is systemctl, this is an apt name to interface with and control the system daemon, which is an executable it also provides, but not one that is intended to be directly invoked from the command daemon. ImageMagick is also far more than the command line utility that it provides to interface with it's library. Say that it had been written by a third party, but did the same thing using the ImageMagick library as a dependency, would it then be fine for it to have a different name?

seiferteric 6y ago

This was a big pet peeve of mine early in my linux usage as well (still is really). Especially since it is not exactly straight forward to figure out what binaries get installed when you install a package. Almost feels like there should be some namespacing like pkg_name->cmd_name so you can at least tab complete package binaries easily.

EnigmaCurry 6y ago
Arch makes it pretty easy to recall: # Who owns binary? pacman -Qo /bin/ls # What files come with package? pacman -Ql coreutils | grep ......
- seiferteric 6y ago
  Yes debian has the same types of things, but maybe spread across a few commands. I actually just prototyped what I am thinking here https://github.com/seiferteric/pkg_namespace https://github.com/seiferteric/pkg_namespace if anyone is interested.
  - anoncake 6y ago
    It's just `apt-file search /path/to/file` actually. I think there's a dpkg command that is limited to installed packages as well.