On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Dan Nicholson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Julien Cristau <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 14:10:47 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 01:20:26PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: >>> > On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 21:01:30 +0200, Julien Cristau <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > And I'll be using /usr/lib/X11/xorg.conf.d/ because using /etc for the >>> > > default "make my xserver work" snippets just seems wrong (and /usr >>> > > allows me to make sure they're in sync with the packages, not conflated >>> > > with configuration which is the admin's domain). >>> > >>> > Yeah, that's why I picked the 'secondary' path supported by the server >>> > so that a directory in /etc/X11 would completely override these files. >>> > >>> > Sounds like we need to fix the server config file search path to look in >>> > a sensible place rather than $(prefix)/etc/X11 >>> >>> This is untested, but I think the patch below is all it would take to >>> add support for a second "system" directory in $prefix/lib/X11 with >>> lowest priority. >>> >> This is already in {USER,ROOT}_CONFIGDIRPATH, shouldn't it be removed >> from there if we add a new search path? > > Yeah, probably. It was more of a proof of concept patch. Now would be > the best time to look at those standard search paths and make them > sane. There's no real reason to repeat the nonsense in the xorg.conf > searching.
I posted a patch series which addresses most of these shortcomings, I think. See <[email protected]>. http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg-devel/2010-April/006846.html Let me know what you think. -- Dan _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org support Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
