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