RFC: Tripwire name change

[Keith G. Robertson-Turner]

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 12:40:29 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:

> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 00:53:46 +0000, Keith G. Robertson-Turner wrote:
>> http://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1308
>> 
>> Comments welcome.
> 
> Other packages are affected, too, where entries in specspo are
> out-of-date and point to files which don't exist anymore. I've reported
> one of them a long time ago.

Sylpheed, wasn't it?

> However, you cannot blame specspo alone. Part of the problem is that
> you've put documentation into tripwire's %description field. Better move
> quickstart documentation into a separate README file and keep the
> package description short and to the point.

Actually I didn't put it there, it was there already, I inherited it from
the Red Hat release (circa 2000). All I did was modify it to reflect the
new path and name of the script it references - (and that was to address
another old FHS bug - "non-conffile-in-etc"). File that as a bug if you
like, and I'll deal with it. In fact, I'm in favour of that; documentation
has no place in the package description.

However, the above bug only serves to emphasise the fact that specspo is
a (essentially upstream) problem. Currently, if I were to follow that
advice and move the reference to twinstall.sh/tripwire-setup-keyfiles out
of the description, nobody would see the change ... instead they'd see
line 17720 of /usr/share/doc/specspo-9.0.92/dist.pot (translated in one of
the "mo" files), which reads:

"After installing this package, run /etc/tripwire/twinstall.sh to\n"

The *real* irony is ... there *is* no translation for Tripwire anyway ...
it's all in English in the "mo" files, so why is it in there at all?

I'm loath to change the name, but I don't feel comfortable squeezing out
other people's packages either, however in this case I might have to make
an exception. I'm with Warren for making specspo a "Conflicts".

-
K.