On 10/24/2009 11:20 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > DJ Lucas wrote: > > >> I'm now suggesting that BLFS no longer support the alternate >> installation prefixes for X, Gnome, and KDE. The alternate prefixes can >> be supported by the wiki if people are willing to commit to it. >> > <Snip comments by Randy, Guy, Bruce, and Ken>
OK, I think Guy and Ken see my point WRT Gnome. I honestly don't know about KDE, and X really isn't a big issue...it's the packages that don't want to use pkgconfig to find X. Gnome specifically is a pain. For instance, I'm now getting the gvfs issue (Computer: Trash:///, etc...), this problem only existed in previous 2.26.3 because of a lack of gvfs. After reading Lars's message about the symlinks, I now know the problem without having put any time into solving it, but hacking up the autotools scripts will be a pain. Though I haven't given him time to comment yet, I'd be willing to bet that Wayne has no issue with the icons on a /usr only installation. My point is, that with the hacks that are being used to make Gnome work in /opt, there are a lot of items that should be separated that are not...and even in modifying other packages (udev and hal)....though there may be ways around that. Anyway, I'm due for a rebuild as I had inadvertently used SVN instead of 6.4 on my test partition, and Xorg-7.5 (mostly) and Gnome 2.28.1 are out. Curiosity, what is the probability of LFS-6.5 or LFS-7.0 before a BLFS release? I'm guessing pretty high if LFS avoids multi-lib for this release. -- DJ Lucas -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
