On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 02:23:59PM +0100, Thomas de Roo wrote: > I did build Xorg in /usr/X11. That shouldn't be a problem, right? I'm not > sure what went wrong, but I found a workaround: I moved all the options in > /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/* to /etc/X11/xorg.conf, leaving /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d > empty. Now X works, don't ask me why, though... > > Thanks for the help! > Thomas > Glad you got it working. In *theory*, /usr/X11 (or, indeed, any other prefix) *shouldn't* be a problem (if PKG_CONFIG_PATH, PATH and /etc/ld.so.conf know about it - but problems from that would normally be *build* problems). Some time ago (between 2 and 4 years ago, I think) I tried building xorg in /somewhere/xorg-v.w.x and similarly gnome in /somewhere/gnome-2.ab.c (I forget if I was using /opt or /usr for the 'somewhere'). The theory was that I would be able to update xorg, and similarly the part of gnome that I was using, without rebuilding the system.
In the event, I abandonned that - too many build problems. Now I build my normal things in /usr (occasionally, I make an exception for disreputable packages that I need to use for something in the book - they go in /opt and are only referenced when needed [ so, nothing that installs a library - I don't try to modify ld.so.conf ]. The bigger problem with using other prefixes so that newer versions can be built without trashing the current version is that libraries *do* change - if I've linked all my desktop packages against a year-old version of xorg, updating *might* cause obscure breakage. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
