Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality

> debian's attitude is: if you want something different, DIY. and more
> importantly, it lets you DIY.

Err.. what Unix DOESN'T let you DIY?

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Bjoern Brill <brill@samson.math.uni-frankfurt.de>

References:
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Raul Miller <raul@usatoday.com>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Raul Miller <raul@usatoday.com>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: eichin@thok.org (Mark W. Eichin)
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>