Re: git vs git

From: Hendrik Visage <hvjunk@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 31, 2006, 05:05 UTC
Message-ID: <d93f04c70601302105v426201dbhac6abd41cdc4050c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <46a038f90601301216n793f0eb5k34a2b5a7c4e7491e@mail.gmail.com>

On 1/30/06, Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> On 1/31/06, Hendrik Visage <hvjunk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > git isn't
> > working because the wrong git is in the right place :(
>
> Well, I just hit this yesterday on a colleage's machine who was trying
> to get going with git.His first try was to `apt-get install git` and
> as that didn't lead anywhere he fetched the git (scm) sources and
> built them.
>

<snip>

> Not sure how to deal with this. Packages already record (or can
> record) it as a conflict, but source built stuff is different. Perhaps
> during `make install` we should try and exec git --version towards the
> end and print a big fat warning?

Or stop the egos and do a name change as would be the honourable way especially as gitscm is less than a year old...

-- Hendrik Visage