Before really, replying, let me just say that X configuration is pure hell, and as the X maintainer, I know that. Please don't think I'm happy with the siutation. It's just that X is very fragile and has a lot of inertia, so changes need to be handled very carefully. On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 03:59:34PM +0200, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote: > In article <[🔎] 19980815110358.X1264@test.legislate.com> you write: > >Dominik Rothert <domi@debian.org> wrote: > >> why does the xserver do not require xbase ? > > > >Because X is designed so that the xserver can be a different machine > >than the x clients. > > > >That said, the xfree86 xservers should probably suggest xbase. > > is it realy ok for the xservers to run xbase-configure without a xbase > dependency ? iny many cases xbase will be unpacked but not configured, > and i don't think it's good to run xbase-configure from xserver in that state. No, it's not a terrific idea. xbase-configure, if you'll notice, doesn't really have much to do with configuring xbase. It should more properly be called xserver-configure. > maybe i'm too stupid, but the only way to install x11 on debian for me was > to say "n" everytime, till all packages were installed, and then call > XF86Setup manual. is there already a bugreport ? else i should write one, i > guess. Oh, there's a million bugs against XF86Setup with respect to how it gets called and under what circumstances. It should probably be its own package. > also isn't the use of /usr/{bin,lib}/X11 symlinks disrecommended ? No, I'm pretty sure that's standard practice. -- G. Branden Robinson | A committee is a life form with six or Purdue University | more legs and no brain. branden@purdue.edu | -- Robert Heinlein http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgptAqmvHRGwz.pgp
Description: PGP signature