Re: /usr/X11R6

1998-08-28 Thread Andreas Jellinghaus
> Wouldn't bother me if we whacked /usr/X11R6 altogether and just moved all > its stuff into the FHS-compliant places, and left behind the appropriate > symlinks. > > I have no idea if/how this would break existing stuff, though. i see no reason not why it should not work. the dirs under X11R6 pr

Re: /usr/X11R6

1998-08-28 Thread john
Jim Pick writes: > I'd like to get a policy decision on whether /usr/X11R6 is for: > a) the X11 system only > b) the X11 system + all applications that depend upon it I'd vote for a). b) may have made sense years ago when X11 apps were rare and exotic, but now they are just programs. -- John

Re: /usr/X11R6

1998-08-28 Thread Branden Robinson
On Thu, Aug 27, 1998 at 08:03:58PM -0700, Jim Pick wrote: > I'd like to get a policy decision on whether /usr/X11R6 is for: > > a) the X11 system only > > b) the X11 system + all applications that depend upon it > > This is not spelled out clearly in any policy document (or the > FSSTND/FHS)

Re: /usr/X11R6

1998-08-28 Thread Andreas Jellinghaus
> I'd like to get a policy decision on whether /usr/X11R6 is for: > a) the X11 system only > b) the X11 system + all applications that depend upon it i vote for c) every package that is installed by default into X11 this way X11, fvwm and such stuff will go into X11R6, but tcl/tk, gnome, kde

/usr/X11R6

1998-08-28 Thread Jim Pick
Hi, I'd like to get a policy decision on whether /usr/X11R6 is for: a) the X11 system only b) the X11 system + all applications that depend upon it This is not spelled out clearly in any policy document (or the FSSTND/FHS). This was debated a month or so ago (mostly on debian-devel), but