OS X Installer

[Bill Baxter]

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Lutger<lutger.blijdestijn at gmail.com> wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
>> Lutger wrote:
>>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Walter
>>>> Bright<newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>>>> Michel Fortin wrote:
>>>>>> If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and D2 installer install at the same
>>>>>> location and they will overwrite each other. I'd much prefer if D2 and
>>>>>> D1 could coexist without having to go with a special installer or
>>>>>> custom installation instructions. Otherwise it'll be hard for me to
>>>>>> offer the choice between D1 and D2 in Xcode (and I certainly do want
>>>>>> that choice to be available).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>> I've been switching the directories to {dmd, dmd2} so they can coexist.
>>>> Will you rename the DMD2 compiler to 'dmd2' as well?
>>>
>>> That would be very convenient, please consider this.
>>>
>>
>> I think moving forward D2 will be the norm, so I suggest going with dmd1
>> and dmd dir names and dmd1 and dmd binary names.
>>
>>
>> Andrei
>
> Also fine, as long as they are different to ease more complex setups, plus
> it will make it much more convenient to create linux packages for this.

Shouldn't the strategy taken be something more akin to what
multi-version packages like python and perl already do?
They don't just automatically rename old python to be
python<OldVersion> after every new version comes out.

On windows they call it python.exe but put it in a different directory.

On versions of linux I think there are some fancy schemes for setting
up symlinks to particular versions to be the default.  Can't recall
what that system was called.  "Defaults" or something like it.
Anyway, seems like on linux dmd should work with that rather than just
going and changing the names of exes according to whim.

--bb