On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 07:32:33AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:48:24AM -0500, David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Right. The everything that you'd expect to go in to /usr/bin and /usr/lib
will install there, at least as far as Xorg goes. An example of that is
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:15:23AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
David Nusinow wrote:
Currently, it fakes FHS compliancy by creating various
symlinks (/usr/include/X11, /usr/bin/X11, /usr/lib/X11) to the appropriate
directories in /usr/X11R6. For 7.0, we need to make those symlinks become
Russ Allbery wrote:
(Or is
imake going away completely?)
Yep.
Imake is still being shipped for the benefit of third-party packages, but it
is not used by anything in Xorg 7.0 IIRC. Doing a quick check, I think very
few if any other packages in Debian use imake.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yep.
Imake is still being shipped for the benefit of third-party packages,
but it is not used by anything in Xorg 7.0 IIRC. Doing a quick check, I
think very few if any other packages in Debian use imake.
I think you should perhaps check a little
Matthias Klose wrote:
Joey Hess writes:
Debian GCC Maintainers debian-gcc@lists.debian.org
gcc-snapshot
no. must be a false positive.
Yes, didn't anchor the pattern and it matched stuff in
/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description:
Joey Hess writes:
Debian GCC Maintainers debian-gcc@lists.debian.org
gcc-snapshot
no. must be a false positive.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Russ Allbery wrote:
Here's a list of packages that install binaries into /usr/X11R6/bin and
don't have lintian overrides for it. In spot checks, about a quarter of
these packages use imake. And that's just the packages with binaries;
there are a number of other packages that don't install
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Imake is considered dead-except-for-routine-maintenance upstream as far
as I can tell, so best practice would be to migrate away from it.
Unless someone plans to adopt it.
imake the program, and xmkmf, are *probably* not that horribly difficult
to
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 09:22:24PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
Because the remainder of the Xorg 7.0 packages will require this change
to have taken place, they will have to pre-depend upon an appropriate
version of x11-common. As such, I'm writing to the list in accordance with
policy.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 08:55:00AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
There is some software that contains hardcoded paths to executables in
/usr/bin/X11; for example, sshd hardcodes the path to
/usr/bin/X11/xauth. sshd stats whatever it thinks is the location of
xauth to find out whether it can do
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 09:54:54PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Right. The everything that you'd expect to go in to /usr/bin and
/usr/lib will install there, at least as far as Xorg goes. An example of
that is that the new xterm package installs to
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 07:32:33AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:48:24AM -0500, David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Right. The everything that you'd expect to go in to /usr/bin and /usr/lib
will install there, at least as far as Xorg goes. An example of that is
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 02:48:33AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
David Nusinow wrote:
Right. The everything that you'd expect to go in to /usr/bin and /usr/lib
will install there, at least as far as Xorg goes. An example of that is
that the new xterm package installs to /usr/bin rather than
Hi all,
One of the changes happening for Xorg 7.0 is that it will finally become
FHS compliant. Currently, it fakes FHS compliancy by creating various
symlinks (/usr/include/X11, /usr/bin/X11, /usr/lib/X11) to the appropriate
directories in /usr/X11R6. For 7.0, we need to make those symlinks
David Nusinow wrote:
One of the changes happening for Xorg 7.0 is that it will finally become
FHS compliant.
FWIW, the FHS 2.1 specifies /usr/X11R6 in section 4.1. I can't see
anything FHS-incompliant about the current setup.
Currently, it fakes FHS compliancy by creating various
symlinks
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:15:23AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
David Nusinow wrote:
One of the changes happening for Xorg 7.0 is that it will finally become
FHS compliant.
FWIW, the FHS 2.1 specifies /usr/X11R6 in section 4.1. I can't see
anything FHS-incompliant about the current setup.
David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:15:23AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
David Nusinow wrote:
Currently, it fakes FHS compliancy by creating various symlinks
(/usr/include/X11, /usr/bin/X11, /usr/lib/X11) to the appropriate
directories in /usr/X11R6. For 7.0, we
[David Nusinow]
As far as I understand it, this is simply grandfathered in. I'm not
that up on the FHS details though, so I may be wrong. Remember also
that this isn't X11R6 any more, but X11R7.
Branden toyed with the idea of setting ProjectRoot to /usr when
packaging XFree86 4.0. I was
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:48:24AM -0500, David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Right. The everything that you'd expect to go in to /usr/bin and /usr/lib
will install there, at least as far as Xorg goes. An example of that is
that the new xterm package installs to /usr/bin rather than
David Nusinow wrote:
As far as I understand it, this is simply grandfathered in. I'm not that up
on the FHS details though, so I may be wrong. Remember also that this isn't
X11R6 any more, but X11R7.
Ok, /usr/X11R7 would probably violate either the spirit or the letter of the
FHS (probably not
20 matches
Mail list logo
