Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> my question was about the logic which lead to this condition of this
> gimp and its ability to install different versions, side by side.
> like the good old days.
I am sorry but I think I answered that question. Which part of the
answer did you not understand? I've quoted my answer below.
> > "That's the reason that gimp-2.1 cannot be installed into the same
> > prefix as gimp-2.0. It's supposed to replace it. Currently there's
> > the temporary condition that gimp-2.1 installs quite some things
> > into directories versioned as 2.1. This is supposed to be changed
> > back to 2.0 when gimp-2.2 is ready."
I admit that "temporary condition" probably doesn't make much sense
but that was me using your words. What I was trying to say is that the
current behaviour of installing things into directories versioned
"2.1" is going to be reverted for 2.2. If possible, everything will go
into the same directories that gimp-2.0 uses.
Gimp-developer mailing list