Re: Bug Terrorism and 'move xpm' - statement
On Tue, Mar 17, 1998 at 10:11:29AM +0000, Mark Baker wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 1998 at 09:51:43AM +0100, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > Then the user should not search for icons and all programs with icons
> > (like windowmanager) search in the same directory.
> Yes, I agree.
> > We should discuss this policy a second time. Is this idea so bad?
> > Packages with a lot of icons and backgrounds and so on, should package
> > two packages: package-bin package-icons. (like gnome). Then all
> > user can install the icons without the program.
> But are you really so stupid you can't distinguish between generally useful
> pixmaps such as those that come with window managers and file managers and
> ones that are used within a particular program?
> We have a few standard directories for executables. Should we put all the
> scripts and things that are currently under /usr/lib/$(package) into them?
> Of course we don't. They're not of any use to the user and would cause
> namespace pollution. Why do you think pixmaps are any different?
Scripts and Progarms under /usr/lib/$(package) are programs, that not for
the User. Like pinepgp/sign or news/bin/* and so on. (This programs
are not in PATH and hasn't a man-page.) This program are not for user or
systemuser (like root).
Alle Programs for User (or root) are in ONE directory /usr/bin!
(in /bin are only programs, that use on boot-time or to repair of a system.
and programs in /usr/sbin are only for root)
So I say:
Alle icons should go in ONE directory. So the User have on 'ICONPATH'
and shouldn't search for the nice icons.
When you don't like /usr/X11R6/include/X11/pixmaps, we should move the
icons to /usr/share/icons/ ? Is his a better place ?
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com