[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freenx-knx
Subject:    Re: [FreeNX-kNX] freenx is dead !
From:       "Durk Strooisma" <durk () kern ! nl>
Date:       2007-11-02 9:02:38
Message-ID: 32974.217.170.42.100.1193994158.squirrel () webmail ! kern ! nl
[Download RAW message or body]

> I've been made aware of some even more important (and good) reasons for
> not following the FHS when installing NX. More important reasons than
> the ones I gave above. Read about them here:
>
>   http://www.nomachine.com/ar/view.php?ar_id=AR01C00130
>
> I can understand these. They are even "heavy" enough to keep violating
> the FHS even *after* the GPL source base of NX have moved to a newer
> Xorg's FHS template layout (contrary to what I stated as "very likely
> will be too much work").

Honestly I'm not really impressed. Seems more like a configuration
management issue and more important to developers than end users.
Distributions like Debian need to change the structure anyway, as violating
the FHS is not allowed. It's more work for them.

The reasons NoMachine is giving could be true for almost every piece of
software. Nothing special in there. Still a lot of software projects obey
the FHS. It's just a matter of preference. Apparently, NoMachine finds
keeping everything in one place more important than being
standards-complaint.
Durk


________________________________________________________________
     Were you helped on this list with your FreeNX problem?
    Then please write up the solution in the FreeNX Wiki/FAQ:
  http://openfacts.berlios.de/index-en.phtml?title=FreeNX_FAQ
         Don't forget to check the NX Knowledge Base:
                 http://www.nomachine.com/kb/ 

________________________________________________________________
       FreeNX-kNX mailing list --- FreeNX-kNX@kde.org
      https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/freenx-knx
________________________________________________________________
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]