Comment 8 for bug 252026

You may not want to call this a bug, but to a user the behaviour is indistinguishable from a bug. When something is installed, the user expects to be able to execute the program without having to figure out that it's been somewhere elsewhere than in his path. At the very least, there should be some sort of warning about this unexpected behavioue when the package is installed. However, I would urge you to reconsider the "this is not a bug" stance.

In detail, the reasons I think that you should reconsider this stance:

"They are low-level utilities"

What does "low-level" mean? They are scripts, so by definition they can hardly be "low-level". System calls are low-level.

"that most users aren't interested in"

But the user has explicitly installed this package. Therefore, by definition, *this* user *is* interested in them.

"and they have generic names that pollute the namespace"

So are there other programs that are in other packages and which ARE installed into the path that duplicate these names? If there is indeed a name clash, then I agree that there is a problem and someone should consider changing the names in one of the packages. If there is no name clash, then what is the issue?