Hi, * IOhannes m zmoelnig <[email protected]> [2017-02-06 07:53]: > On 2017-02-06 13:41, Peter P. wrote: > > Not really. I just prefer to have files and folders once on my system if > > that's sufficient for proper operation as it is easier to remember and > > maintain for me. > > actually, the /usr/lib/... is just a symlink to /usr/share/..., so the > files are indeed only stored once on your harddisk. Thank you, this is clear to me now. > > I guess you are trying to have Pd's docs in its traditional location in > > /usr/lib/pd and in a Debain-style /usr/share/doc path. > > > > I am also surprised there is > > /usr/lib/puredata/extra > > and / > > /usr/lib/pd/extra > > which are owned by different packages respectively. Why not make > > /usr/lib/puredata equal to /usr/lib/pd? > > because they are not equal. > /usr/lib/puredata is meant for externals that only work with the > "puredata" package (aka Pd-vanilla), whereas /usr/lib/pd/extra is for > externals that work with any flavour. Aha, this was not clear to me from the two paths alone. Thank you for the explanation.
> this is a left-over from the days of the pipe-dreams of co-existing > pd-vanilla and pd-extended Debian packages. And could be consolidated maybe even? > today's forks (pd-l2ork, purrdata) actively reject the notion of binary > compatibility (so they must not look for externals in /usr/lib/pd/extra) "must not" or "do not have to"? > apart from that, i question your methodolofy: which package is the owner > of /usr? Thank you, is there an alternative way of posing that question so that I could benefit (ie. understand it) more easily? best, P _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
