Hi Rahul,
On Fri, 2020-10-02 at 17:30 -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 4:57 PM Boian Bonev wrote:
> I didn't start that project, just improved it, and somehow changing
> the
>
> name does not seem right to me :)
Here I mean the project name, which is iotop-c. I see no problem in
renaming the binary.
This isn't a minor change and the current name is a bit awkward
and
because of a shared name, you have to deal with Conflicts or
alternatives neither of help with ease of use ex: I want to install
them both to compare them side by side. I would agree with Matthew
that a name change is warranted here. At the minimum, rename the
binary. Here is a parallel for that
Thanks for your advise, I will wait to see if something else is
proposed and will most probably go with renaming the binary. What would
be the best choice (iotop-c, iotop_c or iotopc)?
As long as this is a tool only for root (or a capped user),
alternatives still seem better to me - it wouldn't at all concern
unprivileged users, while allowing to run e.g. program-c or program-go
and still have program symlinked to the preferred one, but of course I
may miss something and be wrong here.
From what I see, this have completely replaced the other project. I do
not have that goal.
My selfish desire is some day to be able to dnf install and use it,
without compiling from source or copying a binary.
With best regards,
b.