[please cc' me on the replies]

What would it take for a package to replace a NetBSD command?

We're talking about merging the NetAtalk userland support into the tree.
That'd mean atalkd, nbplkup, etc would live in /usr/libexec or /usr/bin,
etc..

Right now there are two major NetAtalk packages. One's from the netatalk
group at the University of Michigan. The other from a student at the
University of Washington. I think the former is a better long-run support
choice, but the latter has more features at the moment (like
AppleshareIP).

My thought at the moment is to install the Michigan version into the tree,
and have the other available as a package. But then the package would
somehow have to turn off the in-/usr versions. Including the libraries.

So can a package rename arbitrary files (and then rename them back upon
deletion)? That'd be the easiest solution. Have the package rename the
shipped-w/-NetBSD versions to something else. Exactly what it gets
replaced with should probably be left up to the package system.

The other alternative, to put /usr/pkg/bin in front of /usr/bin in root's
path and to mess with ldconfig so /usr/pkg/lib gets searched before
/usr/lib, opens too many things up to complications in my opinion.

Thoughts? 

Take care,

Bill

Hmm. If we did this right, we could make the secr set a package as it too
overwrites NetBSD-shipped files. I'm not sure what that'd buy us, other
than knowing if a system has export-controlled files & making it easy to
revert a working system to an exportable state (pkg_delete
netbsd_domestic).