* Curtis Olson -- Friday 30 January 2009:
The traditional unix scheme, and most linux packaging schemes, assume only
one version of the software at one time. [...]
How about running a live version off a CD?
I don't see the problem. There's one executable, which you start like any
other
* Melchior FRANZ -- Sunday 01 February 2009:
Any of the applications are only interested in FG_DATA. And please
not again a fallback from FG_DATA to FG_ROOT/data, because that
just repeats that old mistake.
No, wait! This would actually be ok: If FG_DATA is defined, use
data from there.
* someone off list, but IMHO this should be discussed openly:
[...] but the intent is for FG_ROOT to point to a top level
directory (i.e. the root) and beneath that would be bin/
data/ src/ lib/ include/ etc
There's only one reason why we need to point fgfs and associated
scripts and
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Melchior FRANZ mfr...@aon.at wrote:
* someone off list, but IMHO this should be discussed openly:
[...] but the intent is for FG_ROOT to point to a top level
directory (i.e. the root) and beneath that would be bin/
data/ src/ lib/ include/ etc
Wow,
* Curtis Olson -- Friday 30 January 2009:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Melchior FRANZ mfr...@aon.at wrote:
Wow, I'm sorry if I caught you on a bad day.
This was a good day! Until someone reported once again how he ran into
this stupid ambiguity, and someone else posted a broken fix. And it
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
A design goal of flightgear has always been to keep
itself contained in one area and be a good citizen of your hard drive.
This assumption suggests a badly laid out file hierarchy.
No; it does not.
It's tailored for FlightGear
6 matches
Mail list logo
