Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2002/05/03/21:10:26
Robert Collins wrote:
> I'm agnostic on this one, I don't use X enough to really care. However,
> Earnie has pointed out that extra path elements have a lamentable
> performance impact, so perhaps we should be avoiding that?
Yeah, but X itself goes into /usr/X11R6/bin and that will never change.
So systems with X will have /usr/bin and /usr/X11R6/bin in their PATH
no matter what. So this is really a non-issue.
However, as I stated earlier, RH and SuSe and Mandrake all put their X
applications into /usr/bin (with the exceptions noted previously).
> I'm 100% with you here. If it's a package, then it goes under release.
> If we want a completely separate tree, create a new location and a new
> setup.ini, and then that becomes the cygwin-xfree lists domain, and they
> can have whatever policy they want. Whilst it's in the main setup.ini,
> they need to follow the policies that this list has hammered out - with
> much pain.
I don't think there needs to be a *completely* separate tree. I was
just saying this:
release/cygwin
release/zlib
release/Xsomething/cgoban
release/Xsomething/windowmaker
release/Xsomething/lesstif
release/XFree86/xfree86-base/
release/XFree86/xfree86-fonts/
release/XFree86/xfree86-.../
All under release. All follow the official rules for packaging.
**EXCEPT**
XFree86 itself is configured with --prefix=/usr/X11R6/ This has already
been settled.
**MAYBE**
stuff that is X-linked (e.g. goes under release/Xsomething/) MIGHT be
configured --prefix=/usr/X11R6/ IFF we amend the official rules to
allow that.
We have not yet done so, and might not do it ever.
--Chuck
- Raw text -