El Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 08:32:12PM +0200, Miguel A. Arévalo va escriure: > El sáb, 02-10-2004 a las 11:20 -0500, Ian Murdock escribió: > > Hi everyone, > > > > To specify a theme, then, the custom distro builder supplies a package > > that "Provides" and "Conflicts" with "cl-branding", which gdm (and other > > packages that use this mechanism depend on to ensure some default > > branding is present), and places the appropriate files in the > > appropriate places. For example, the "progeny-branding" package (which > > provides branding for Progeny Debian 2.0) installs its default > > theme to /usr/share/gdm/themes/default. (The "Conflicts" > > ensures that only one package can provide the "default" theme.) > > I think it is quite improbable for mantainers of current packages to > support this. AFAICS it will involve creating a quite fat default > branding package "cl-branding" and making all the brand-able packages > depend on it, and consolidating on it all the default branding for all > the packages. This is not going to happen. > > I've been already thinking about that and found that the solution is > already developed, we can use the alternatives system already present in > Debian, so: I think that your idea of using the alternatives system is not bad and maybe can be used for the branding of some applications, but, to be fair, it seems an overkill for something that only implies a variable value change inside a configuration file. Anyway, maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that every body is trying to avoid handling configuration files and usually they are the best place to do this kind of things... i.e. what happens if the branding has nothing to do with files (like variables that indicate colors or names or whatever)? -- Sergio Talens-Oliag <sto@debian.org> <http://people.debian.org/~sto/> Key fingerprint = 29DF 544F 1BD9 548C 8F15 86EF 6770 052B B8C1 FA69
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature