Yves Arrouye:
> So why do we choose to use /usr/share for locales, for example? I
> remember we discussed that and adopted /usr/share, no?
Dave, my memory is failing, Dave, stop...
I can't remember the discussion, but perhaps it was because
the FSSTND does not forbid the use of /usr/share, and th
On Sep 17, 11:37am, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
} Subject: Bug#4495: gs fonts should be in /usr/share/ghostscript/fonts
} --==_Exmh_840876923P
} Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
}
} joost witteveen:
} > Could you (or somebody else on this list) point me to some text that
} > details thi
> > 1. Fonts are machine independent files that should be shared (in
> > /usr/share).
>
> Could you (or somebody else on this list) point me to some text that
> details this rule? My /usr/share is next to empty, while /usr/lib contains
> _lot's_ of system-independand files (pgp, samba, texmf, z
joost witteveen:
> Could you (or somebody else on this list) point me to some text that
> details this rule? My /usr/share is next to empty, while /usr/lib
> contains _lot's_ of system-independand files
/usr/share is part of the next revision of the FSSTND (now called
FHS). I don't think Debian ha
>
> Package: gsfonts
> Version: 4.01-2
>
> Gs fonts are installed under usr/lib/ghostscript/4.01/fonts. There are two
> problems with this:
>
> 1. Fonts are machine independent files that should be shared (in
> /usr/share).
Could you (or somebody else on this list) point me to some text that
Package: gsfonts
Version: 4.01-2
Gs fonts are installed under usr/lib/ghostscript/4.01/fonts. There are two
problems with this:
1. Fonts are machine independent files that should be shared (in /usr/share).
2. Gs fonts are regular PostScript fonts, not tied to a given version of
gs, so t
6 matches
Mail list logo
