Please don't CC me on list mails.
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 11:54:09AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > I was hoping to avoid this, but developing consensus on -policy seems to be
> > that I should do this. Sigh.
> >
> >> [1] Verified, that is lib/Xt/Initialize.c, XtScreenDatabase()
> >
> > I'm not sure it's not the only one. It's not just Xt-using apps that read
> > app-defaults, IIRC. I think the Xrm* functions may deal with it as well.
> > I'll check this out.
> >
> >> [2] And yeah I looked at the code and it looks doable. Insert a check for
> >> a file in the old directory around line 534 of the file in [1].
> >
>
> Indeed, I believe this is an Xrm issue, not necessarily a Xt one.
Turns out that app-defaults is just an Xt convention. This further
underscores the distinction between app-defaults and X resources, which
most people think are the same thing. :)
In a nutshell, app-defaults are a way of storing default information about
the program external to its binary. They are strictly client-side, whereas
X resources are stored within the server.
> Hacking X to do this seems bad. Why did upstream not have a similar redundant
> search path?
Don't know.
--
G. Branden Robinson | When dogma enters the brain, all
Debian GNU/Linux | intellectual activity ceases.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Robert Anton Wilson
http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |
PGP signature
