Kendall Bennett wrote (in a message from Monday 31)
> Kevin Brosius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Depends somewhat on how RH does X init. You can look through
> > startx and xinit setup and see what's being changed.
>
> Isn't the installer supposed to not replace xinit.rc if the file already
> exists? That is what the comment in the xf86site.def file says, but that
> would appear not to be the case?
Yes it's supposed to be the case. That's why it would be good to find
out what the exact problem is. I suspect it's a file that appears (ie
some file that isn't present in RH default install and gets installed
by 'make install') that causes this problem, but I'm not sure.
> Granted, but since XFree86 appears to be starved for developers and
> testers, don't you think it would be a good idea to make it painless for
> testers to do a full build and install *without* blowing away their
> current system configuration?
Sure it *is* a problem that should be solved. But it's hard to guess
what is in RH config that causes it to fail.
> Might make more people willing to test
> XFree86 releases on their machines. One experience like I had for the
> average tester who just wants to help out is likely to cause him to re-
> install his Linux distro and never run a 'make install' again ;-)
We all agree. But problems can't be fixed only by complaining. Could
you send us lists of files (with sizes or modification dates) and
symlinks in /etc/X11 before (that is the clean RH installer result)
and after 'make install' on a RH system ? That would probably help
finding what's wrong.
Matthieu
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
