Does it make sense to keep on using the version number (1.0, 1.1) in
the path for the $prefix/lib directory when it is not used for the
files in the $prefix/share directory?

Currently, all (binary) plug-ins and modules are stored in the
directory $prefix/lib/gimp/1.1/plug-ins (which should probably be
"libexec" and not "lib") and $prefix/lib/gimp/1.1/modules.  The
previous version of the Gimp used .../lib/gimp/1.0/...  All other
files are stored in $prefix/share/gimp, without any version number.
This includes the gimprc file and the scripts, among other things.

The original idea for using the version number in the path to the
plug-ins was to allow future versions of the Gimp to co-exist in the
same $prefix if possible.  But it just does not work.  You have to use
a different $prefix or to change at least the path to $prefix/share if
you want this to work, because the files that are installed in
$prefix/share/gimp cannot be used by the old version of the Gimp.
First, you would loose all scripts that are overwritten by the newer
ones (with an incompatible API) and second, the old gimp would be
confused by the new gimprc, which contains some options that are not
understood by version 1.0 and sets the paths to use the 1.1 plug-ins
and modules.

So if the old and new versions cannot co-exist in the same $prefix
anyway, why do we use the version number in the libdir?  Or,
alternatively, why don't we add the version number in the datadir?

By the way, what will happen to the ~/.gimp-1.1 user directory when
version 1.2 is ready?  Will this be renamed to ~/.gimp or ~/.gimp-1.2
or ~/.gimp/1.2?

-Raphael

P.S.: I identified this problem when I tried to start an old version
      of the Gimp in order to check why the "Frosty" script was not
      giving the same results as in 1.0.  If anybody knows why this
      logo script does not produce the same effects as it used to
      create, please tell me...

Reply via email to