Bug#735134: perl: rename(1) is ancient

[Don Armstrong]

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, Niko Tyni wrote:
> I note that we really ship the script as /usr/bin/prename and manage
> /usr/bin/rename with the alternatives system. This was introduced due
> to #304705 but turned out to be completely useless: the intention was
> to offer the choice of /usr/bin/rename.ul from util-linux, but that
> didn't work out because the command line syntax is incompatible (see
> #439935).

So long as the base command line syntax is compatible, then there isn't
really a problem with using alternatives to support them both. [I have
to admit that my advice in #304705 to support alternatives was naïve, as
alternatives need to share a common command line syntax.]
 
> So the /usr/bin/rename syntax we've ended up with is very Perl specific
> and I think we're stuck with that. I'm Cc'ing Don Armstrong though,
> as he suggested using the alternatives system in #304705 and may have
> something to add.
> 
> I suggest something like
> 
> - package libfile-rename-perl
> - make it supply a better /usr/bin/rename with the alternatives system
> - make the old one from the perl package issue warnings, Recommend 
>   libfile-rename-perl for one release cycle

I don't know if this is actually necessary. We could just have perl
depend on libfile-rename-perl once we remove debian/rename. Or just keep
rename as it is currently. But I'm OK with either option so long as
/usr/bin/rename keeps the same syntax.


-- 
Don Armstrong                      http://www.donarmstrong.com

I'm So Meta, Even This Acronym
-- xkcd http://xkcd.com/917/