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".
On Thu, 2002-01-17 at 02:55, Jarno Elonen wrote:
> It's that they grow /usr/bin quite a lot faster than any "conventional" unix
> tools and make it very hard to have multiple versions of the desktop on a
> same computer.
If the upstream authors don't (or can't) make it so multiple versions
can
Jarno Elonen, on 2002-01-17, 10:46, you wrote:
> If I don't know Unix very deeply and/or don't have time to compile the old
> version from sources and install them to /usr/local or /opt (as could easily
Then simply do
dpkg --instdir=/opt/kde --install $ALLMYKDEPACKAGES
or set this option in
> > "/usr/kde2/qtcups/ with /usr/bin/qtcups ->
> > /usr/kde/qtcups/bin/qtcups" -model. You could the packages nicely inside as
> > many subdirectries as you like; perhaps using lsm cathegories or Debian's
> > menu policy for desktop systems?
>
> I think a much better way to do this is to allow you
Jarno Elonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
> True, but could there be someday? For example, let's suppose that I have a
> program I like very much and use daily. Then, Debian changes from KDE2 to
> KDE3 (or any other big similar change), it stops working.
If it stops working, why n
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 09:55:12AM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote:
> It's that they grow /usr/bin quite a lot faster than any "conventional" unix
> tools and make it very hard to have multiple versions of the desktop on a
> same computer.
This is a deficiancy in the packaging system. It applies to a
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"
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 09:16:54AM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote:
> > I think you are going backwards in time somewhat.
> > That's the past, and the current trend is to move away from such setup,
> > and some people thought it is even better to remove /usr entirely.
>
> How so? What has been suggested
On Thursday 17 January 2002 04:11 am, Jarno Elonen wrote:
> To overcome the graphical browser issue in administration etc. in the
> future, however, I was requesting comments on the
> "/usr/kde2/qtcups/ with /usr/bin/qtcups ->
> /usr/kde/qtcups/bin/qtcups" -model. You could the packages nicely insi
Hi Jarno!
You 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
Why? Can't we rather get rid of the seperate X dir?
--
Kind regards,
+
> > * 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
>
> Is there some sort of maximum size for /usr/bin I don't know of?
I guess the limit is just practical, not really dictated by f
> That is not correct. The distribution (Debian for now) only contains one
> version of The Software.
True, but could there be someday? For example, let's suppose that I have a
program I like very much and use daily. Then, Debian changes from KDE2 to
KDE3 (or any other big similar change), it st
Joerg Wendland, on 2002-01-17, 09:25, you wrote:
> for loving loving Debian ;-)
s/loving loving/people loving/ too much love will kill you :-)
Joerg
--
Joerg "joergland" Wendland
GPG: 51CF8417 FP: 79C0 7671 AFC7 315E 657A F318 57A3 7FBD 51CF 8417
pgp5sZrzB01FW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
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
Is there some sort of maximum size for /usr/bin I don't know of?
I think
Jarno Elonen, on 2002-01-17, 09:55, you wrote:
> It's that they grow /usr/bin quite a lot faster than any "conventional" unix
> tools and make it very hard to have multiple versions of the desktop on a
> same computer. Unlike libc5/libc6 for example, KDE for example consist of
That is not corre
> > * 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
>
> Define many. I also don't see what the advantage would be of moving
> it to a seperate directory. Without knowing what the actu
> > Does it make any sense? I.e. have I missed some important aspect of Unix
> > here?
>
> I think you are going backwards in time somewhat.
> That's the past, and the current trend is to move away from such setup,
> and some people thought it is even better to remove /usr entirely.
How so? What h
On Wed, 2002-01-16 at 16:19, 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
>
> * Some proposed using /opt/kde3. Arguments:
I strongly, strongly object to this.
Previously 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
Define many. I also don't see what the advantage would be of moving
it to a seperate directory. Without k
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
Jarno Elonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
> Does it make any sense? I.e. have I missed some important aspect of Unix
> here?
I think you are going backwards in time somewhat.
That's the past, and the current trend is to move away from such setup,
and some people thought it is even
Hi - again,
I already requested comments for the following filesystem layout on the KDE
list but I guess this list is a bit more appropriate for the subject.
Now that I've thought a bit more about it, I think this possibly could work
with ordinary symlinks, too, and moving to the new layout wou
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
23 matches
Mail list logo
