Re: Rxvt question
On Mon, Jun 28, 1999 at 09:44:41PM -0400, Brian Mays wrote:
> and it would add the following symlinks to the package:
> gbrxvt -> crxvt-gb
> b5rxvt -> crxvt-big5
> crxvt -> crxvt-big5
> Therefore, I have the following questions:
> 1) There are two ways to distinguish alternate versions of the rxvt
> binary: (1) adding a prefix to the name (e.g., krxvt); (2) adding a
> suffix to the name (e.g., rxvt-xpm). Anthony's patch uses both of these
> methods. That is, it adds a suffix to the name and uses a symbolic
> links that add a prefix to the name. Are both of these methods really
> necessary? In my opinion, it would be better to drop the b5rxvt and
> gbrxvt symbolic links and distinguish the two binaries with the -gb and
> -big5 suffices.
I would prefer this method too. I guess users can also emulate this
by using the shell alias...
> 2) Shouldn't the crxvt symbolic link use Debian's alternatives scheme,
> so that the system administrator can choose whether crxvt runs the Big5
> version or the GB version of rxvt?
> In other words, I recommend that the symbolic links be replaced with the
> crxvt -> /etc/alternatives/crxvt -> /usr/X11R6/bin/crxvt-big5
Yes. I think the policies should be followed. But what about xpm??
Are you going to have all of the following??
It is a pain to do this, but this seems the only way to satisfy everyone...
Any other comments??
> Thus, there would be no gbrxvt and b5rxvt. This is what I recommend;
> however, I defer to whatever the members of this mailing list decide.
> Please let me know what you think.
> Thank you,
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
Shao Zhang - Running Debian 2.1 ___ _ _____
Department of Communications / __| |_ __ _ ___ |_ / |_ __ _ _ _ __ _
University of New South Wales \__ \ ' \/ _` / _ \ / /| ' \/ _` | ' \/ _` |
Sydney, Australia |___/_||_\__,_\___/ /___|_||_\__,_|_||_\__, |
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org |___/