Re: [PATCH] doc: Add a cautionary note

[Pádraig Brady]

On 15/10/18 00:40, Mihir Mehta wrote:
> Hi Pádraig,
> 
> 
> On Sunday 14 October 2018 10:37 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> Why was bison++ suggested?
>> Is there an overlap in commands used in these packages?
>> I.E. could the disambiguation be done in the packaging?
> The packages "bison" and "bison++" are suggested, in Debian and 
> derivatives, as alternatives to provide "bison" on the command-line. The 
> trouble I'm trying to address with this patch is that these two "bison" 
> executables (or scripts - I haven't checked) do not do the same thing, 
> and in particular the version from "bison++" screws up compilation of 
> the coreutils.
> 
> I'm not sure how the disambiguation could be done in the packaging.

It seems that both bison and bison++ provide /usr/bin/bison on your distro.
This violates some debian standards so should be fixed up in the distro.
I suggest the debian bison++ package should not provide /usr/bin/bison,
especially since it's not fully compatible.
I also note that bison++ is not available at all in Fedora.

cheers,
Pádraig.

p.s. From experience I feel it's important to fix things in the right place,
as short term workarounds tend to be long lived and compound as the
line between workaround and core functionality blurs