Missing "juju-2"/"juju2" command.

[Eric Snow]

For Juju 1 I found the following commands installed:

* /usr/bin/juju
* /usr/bin/juju1
* /usr/bin/juju-1
* /usr/bin/juju-1.25
* /usr/lib/juju-1.25/bin/juju

For Juju 2 I found:

* /usr/bin/juju-2.0
* /usr/lib/juju-2.0/bin/juju
* /usr/bin/juju.default

The problem is that, unlike Juju 1, to use the Juju 2 CLI one must hard-code the specific version (e.g. 2.0). Once the next major Juju version (e.g. 2.1) comes out and is installed, such hard-coded, version-specific binary paths will break.

To avoid this problem, I'd like a "/usr/bin/juju2" (and/or "juju-2") be installed alongside the others.

[Martin Packman (gz)]

Ideally we don't have that many aliases for the same thing (and some of those /usr/bin files are not from our latest packaging)?

I think what you really want is to just run `/usr/bin/juju` but realise having juju-1-default makes that more complicated as well. So, I see some benefit in a any-2-series juju alias, but think we'll get pushback on usability of having too many similarly named commands installed by default.

See thread from when this was originally being discussed for some more info:

<https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/2016-April/005313.html>

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

[Anastasia (anastasia-macmood)]

Removing 2.1 milestone as we will not be addressing this issue in 2.1.

[Nicholas Skaggs (nskaggs)]

This issue should be corrected now as of 2.1-beta5. There is a juju-2 symlink you can depend on that will point to the latest juju-2 binary on your system.

[Anastasia (anastasia-macmood)]

I am pretty sure that @pangkit's status changes were invalid. I'll revert them back to what they were prior to these changes.