On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 10:50 +0200, solsTiCe d'Hiver wrote: > hi. > why can't you bear to see some software lie in /opt ? > what's so annoying about that ? > > so please, tell us: > What's the real reason to move xfce and gnome to /usr ? > to please some loudly users who whant that move ? > to fix what issues ?
Advantages of a /usr prefix in case of gnome: - no need for a new login after installing packages like gnome-common - no need to move icons from /opt/gnome/share/icons to /usr/share/icons - no need to move themes from /opt/gnome/share/themes to /usr/share/themes - no need to exclude metacity themes from that - files are spread far less over the filesystem (desktops have to search 4 prefixes for icons, themes and .desktop files as it is now) I think this summarizes the most important issues we have with a /opt prefix. Given the things above, leaving one of those steps out will result in a buggy package, where it wouldn't result in a buggy package when the package is in /usr. An example of this is icons in the hicolor theme: hicolor lives in /usr, where it is indexed. Buggy packages stuff these icons in /opt/xfce4 and /opt/gnome, where these are not indexed. GTK2 searches for the icon, mmaps the cache in /usr, doesn't find it, stops looking for it if the icon only exists in the hicolor theme. Result: broken icon. When these packages would be installed in /usr, the lookup would still be broken because the cache doesn't include the icon, but the chance is much higher that a different package will rebuild the cache and include the missing icons. When these icons lived in /opt/gnome, the cache would never ever include it, because it's outside the prefix. _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
