FS#312 - vnc naming

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Ben Mazer (contrasutra) - Saturday, 13 December 2003, 22:05 GMT
Last edited by Judd Vinet (judd) - Sunday, 14 December 2003, 01:26 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Roberto Carvajal (rcarvajal)
Architecture All
Severity Very Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 0.6 Widget
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 0%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

I think we should add "provides=(vnc)" to tightvnc.

I was recently building realvnc, and few apps that depend on vnc depend on a certain implementation, so it would be easier to just depend on "vnc".
This task depends upon

Closed by  Eric Johnson (eric)
Friday, 16 April 2004, 11:07 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Roberto Carvajal (rcarvajal) - Tuesday, 17 February 2004, 12:41 GMT
ehmm.. i need more information about this, what implementation are you talking about?
Comment by Damir Perisa (damir.perisa) - Thursday, 18 March 2004, 21:26 GMT
tightvnc and vnc are in extra ... and they both conflict with each other (some of the files are the same from these) --- i'm going to add provides/conflicts to vnc ... you should add it to tightvnc too
Comment by Roberto Carvajal (rcarvajal) - Thursday, 18 March 2004, 23:43 GMT
right, so tightvnc conflicts with vnc and provides vnc?
Comment by Eric Johnson (eric) - Friday, 16 April 2004, 11:07 GMT
Helping out while Roberto's out-of-commission:

Added a conflicts=('tightvnc') to the vnc PKGBUILD, and a conflicts=('vnc') to the tightvnc PKGBUILD. Only one can be installed that way and I didn't see what purpose a provides line would add in this case. --eric

Loading...