Re: Summary of KDE filesystem discussion

2002-01-17 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The trend is to hide the differences between storage devices, not to > make it visible to the user. This is true, but I'd say it differently. More than saying "trend", I think better to just say "it's right".

Re: Summary of KDE filesystem discussion

2002-01-17 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 11:19:25PM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote: > * Many people feel that KDE (and Gnome) is too large >a whole to be stuffed in /usr/bin, /usr/share etc >and would deserve a separate directory like X Those people have a hard wired path in their mind from "virtual path name"

Re: Summary of KDE filesystem discussion

2002-01-16 Thread Chris Cheney
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 11:51:44PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote: -snip- > > * Some proposed using /opt/kde3. Arguments: > > Not as a Debian package. /opt is for third-party software. > >Julian perhaps you should have read the rest of the email from him... :)

Re: Summary of KDE filesystem discussion

2002-01-16 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 11:19:25PM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote: > Hi, > > May I try to summarize the filesystem discussion on KDE list and suggest that > it will continue in debian-policy? > > * Many people feel that KDE (and Gnome) is too large >a whole to be stuffed in /usr/bin, /usr/share

Summary of KDE filesystem discussion

2002-01-16 Thread Jarno Elonen
Hi, May I try to summarize the filesystem discussion on KDE list and suggest that it will continue in debian-policy? * Many people feel that KDE (and Gnome) is too large a whole to be stuffed in /usr/bin, /usr/share etc and would deserve a separate directory like X * Some proposed using