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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: File locations (was Re: directory for additional services?)
From:       Sean Kendall Schneyer <Sean.Schneyer () kau ! se>
Date:       1999-05-21 19:50:59
[Download RAW message or body]

I'm sorry I came off the wrong way. The problem was that I didn't
have a position to begin with really :o)  What happened was that
I reacted to the fact that I thought you were saying that we 
shouldn't follow the FHS... and then the only reason that you
seemed to give at the time was that we didn't fit into the
"normal" package space. I wasn't trying to be rude in anyway
and wasn't even saying that you were wrong, all I wanted was
a concrete reason why we should _not_ follow the FHS since it
was a standard. Nobody was able to give me a good reason so
I finally pulled up the standard for myself to see why it would
be so hard to follow for us... after reading it I can now see
that we ARE (almost) following the standard. The only thing
that we lack to conform to the standard is an $KDEDIR/man
directory (as specified in section 3.8). 

I am sorry that you felt that I was being rude to you, that
was definately not my intention. I just have a problem with
things not following a standard for no particular reason, so 
I wanted to find out if there was a good reason for us not
to follow the FHS. Since we are following it (unintentionally
perhaps) then it is a mute point. Just for the record, if
everyone that was involved in this discussion (me included)
had actually had a copy of the standard in front of them this
wouldn't have gotten this far.

My apologies,

Sean


Kurt Granroth wrote:
> 
> Sean,
> 
> I don't understand your position at all!  I say that our current situation is
> the way to go and you tell me (rather rudely, I think) that I am wrong.  Then
> you go right back and give this example!  This is exactly what we are doing
> right now!
> 
> What Stephan was suggesting was to NOT have KDE be it's own package in this
> sense.  Our current setup is exactly as you describe below (which, by the way,
> is how I think it should remain).  Stephan was suggesting doing something
> like:
> 
> $prefix/share/kde
> $prefix/etc/kde
> 
> and so on..
> 
> Note that the 'kde' part of it is BELOW the 'share' or 'etc' directories and
> not above it like our current setup.
> 
> This is a big difference.
> 
> Sean Kendall Schneyer wrote:
> > Or using the last clause from §3.4.2 we can assume that the configuration
> > files must reside in a different location for the package to function
> > properly, thus we can go back to my original suggestion but placing
> > it in /opt instead of /devel:
> >
> > /opt/kde1
> >         +--- bin
> >         +--- etc
> >         ...
> >
> > /opt/kde2
> >         +--- bin
> >         +--- etc
> >         ...
> >
> >
> > Is this right? Or have I just completely lost touch with
> > reality?
> 
> --
> Kurt Granroth            | granroth@kde.org
> KDE Developer/Evangelist | http://www.pobox.com/~kurt_granroth
>          KDE -- Putting a Friendly Face on Linux

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sean Kendall Schneyer		Tel: +46 (0)54 700 20 29
Computer Science Department	Fax: +46 (0)54 700 20 60 
Karlstad University		email: mailto:Sean.Schneyer@kau.se
S-651 88 Karlstad Sweden	URL: http://www.cs.kau.se/~sean/

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