On 06/26/2010 08:21 PM, Wayne Blaszczyk wrote: > On top > of this some packages like to create a directory under libexec whilst > others don't.
Missed this in my last reply. I actually hadn't noticed that the directories were created. I have the following from the proposed build method: dj [ ~ ]$ ls /opt/gnome-2.28.2/lib/gnome-2.28.2/*/ -d /opt/gnome-2.28.2/lib/gnome-2.28.2/file-roller/ /opt/gnome-2.28.2/lib/gnome-2.28.2/gedit-2/ /opt/gnome-2.28.2/lib/gnome-2.28.2/gnome-screensaver/ /opt/gnome-2.28.2/lib/gnome-2.28.2/totem/ That is sloppier than I had intended it to be. Guess I was only verifying that "lib/gnome-2.28.2" was in the list of installed files. > I would like to get Randy's option on this before proceeding. Absolutely. I would like to get everyone's opinion who have built a recent Gnome in an alternate prefix before. Is the change more trouble than it is worth? From the editors' POV, is simplifying the commands and explanations worth it anyway? Upstream is already working with us to some extent. GSD did, and I think we might have something on all three of the GDM issues (same developer picked them up), only one is my suggestion (GSD's libexecdir), but a CK library, and possibly setting at runtime for the location of the X server as well as a configure switch look to be slotted. The gio modules dir in gvfs looks to be a dead end, but at least the correct fix is easy enough (and already done). -- 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
