On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 16:32 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 22:27 +0300, Roumen Petrov wrote: > >> I perfectly know that user > >> cannot go in build-dir and just to run secure shell daemon/client. > > > > And if you are happy with that, good for you. In GNOME though, we want > > our users to be able to run uninstalled programs. If this feature is > > not interesting to you, fine. I don't understand why you are so > > opposing it. > > In GNU Smalltalk, "./gst" is used if you don't need to load any plugin, > while "tests/gst" is used if you need plugins; "tests/gst" is created by > config.status. Most of the time launching "./gst" is enough; and since > its startup time is much faster than "tests/gst", I didn't feel the need > to use the more user-friendly executable as the default.
Sure, you have updated for the separate-wrapper option. Now what percentage of your users know the difference between ./gst and tests/gst? How many read the doc explaining the difference? > I see how you might consider this a poor choice if you have a lot of > executables; OTOH autoconf does the same and has 6-7 executables. We're talking about every application using GNOME technology... I don't understand why something as simple as running uninstalled binaries should become so painful on the application developer. > Paolo -- behdad http://behdad.org/ "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
