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/ |
pgprg5qhryCMk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
