[syslinux] Syslinux Project versus its components

[Kevin Landreth]

On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:06 AM, Dag Wieers <dag at wieers.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Oct 2008, Ryan McLean wrote:
>
> >> Maybe LDLINUX? After all it's called ldlinux.asm.
> >
> > Maybe it's just me but that name automatically makes me think of 'ld'.
> >
> > I would be inclined to go for FATLINUX as that follows the naming
> > convention EXTLINUX for ext, PXELINUX for PXE, etc
>
> My biggest concern is that this will break every document and script that
> was using syslinux before. So if we want to call it fatlinux, we should
> still symlink the syslinux command.
>
> But I do think the name change would be better for consistency sake.
>
> --
> --   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
> [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
>
>
You make a great point Dag. But I think your solution would be ideal as
well, especially if (argc[0]  == 'syslinux') { __DEPRECATED(); }  to warn
users about these changes proactively.  The other argument would be that we
as a community need to move or create new documentation on the Syslinux
wiki.  ;)

It is ultimately HPA's choice as it is his project, but I think the thread
has spawned some interesting points for consideration.

-- 
Kevin Landreth, RHCE