Re: Precedence for shadowing a monolithic Fedora package?

On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:35:46 +0200, Nicolas wrote: > Using alternatives seems appropriate, but you can also rename the > binary and the .desktop file so you can have a completely parallele > installable version. > > Conflicting and Obsoleting fedora maintained packages have be avoided. Nah, explicit Conflicts are fine in that case. audacity vs. audacity-freeworld is one example. Users need to choose between either one. Relocating an application and all its files it may read/write just to make it parallel-installable with another build of the same/older/newer application is just not worth the extra effort. And if you don't relocate or rename config/run-time files, there's the risk that this causes side-effects since one app is built with more features than the other one or is a different version even.