[GRASS5] Diffs for grass 5.0.2 package for debian woody now available.

[Glynn Clements]

Glynn Clements wrote:

> > The diff against official grass-5.0.2_src.tar.gz are ready as promised. The 
> > workstation is up and running and if things hold I hope to answer without 
> > lag. The grass-5.0.2_src.tar.gz I used today to make the diffs is the same I 
> > used when making  the source debian package. Today I downloaded:
> > ftp://grass.itc.it/pub/grass/grass5/source/grass-5.0.2_src.tar.gz
> > and made a cmp against my old grass-5.0.2_src.tar.gz to ensure they are the 
> > same.
> > 
> > As usually, you can find everything at: 
> > http://ezralabs.esaurito.net/repository/debian/grass/
> > 
> > In particular: 
> > http://ezralabs.esaurito.net/repository/debian/grass/grass_5.0.2-1.diff.gz
> 
> Looking at the diff, I have a couple of questions:

One other point (for the GRASS developers); this patch:

--- grass-5.0.2.orig/src/CMD/generic/MAKELINKS.sh
+++ grass-5.0.2/src/CMD/generic/MAKELINKS.sh
@@ -10,6 +10,6 @@
 #    then
         echo Creating link for $i
 	rm -f $GISBASE/bin/$i
-        ln $GISBASE/etc/front.end $GISBASE/bin/$i
+        ln -s ../etc/front.end $GISBASE/bin/$i
 #    fi
 done

seems like a reasonable candidate for the official version. Is there
any reason *not* to use symlinks instead of hard links?

I've seen at least two cases where users have tried to update
individual modules and been caught out by the fact that the files in
$GISBASE/bin aren't the real programs. If $GISBASE/bin contained
symlinks, it would be more obvious as to what is going on.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn.clements at virgin.net>