Re: mozilla problems
On Sat, Sep 26, 1998 at 04:44:22PM -0400, Avery Pennarun wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 26, 1998 at 03:10:17PM -0500, john@dhh.gt.org wrote:
>
> > Michael Meskes writes:
> > > So could anyone tell me why a binary that only runs under X has to be
> > > under /usr/bin?
> >
> > Can you tell me why (other than tradition) it should be anywhere else?
> >
> > > ...I'd like to see software that depends on X to be under /usr/X11R6,...
> >
> > I presume, then, that you would like to see software that depends on perl
> > be under /usr/perl5? What will you do with software that depends on both
> > X and perl?
>
> I like the /usr/bin/X11 directory myself, because I think of command-line
> tools and graphical applications as very different beasts. /usr/bin
> contains almost entirely command-line tools; /usr/bin/X11 contains almost
> entirely applications. It's a shame I have to say "almost" there, but the
> placement of many programs is pretty arbitrary.
This is not quite correct. First let me say that there is no /usr/bin/X11
directory. /usr/bin/X11 is a symlink to /usr/X11R6/bin (the physical dir we
speak of), and is provided for users convenience solely [note: I saw later
that you got it right below].
Now to the issue at hand. /usr/X11R6 is reserved for the X11 release 6
distribution. We also use it for certain X software like window managers and
further X servers (I use it for my VNC packages, for example).
But I don't think it's a good idea to use it for user applications in the
common sense. There are several reasons:
1) We have games that run under X, too. They are in /usr/games (a direcotry
we should have dropped long time ago, really).
2) There are programs that work under X and console. Putting them in the X11
tree is inconsistent. Putting them in /usr/bin is not inconsistent if you
consider /usr/bin as the common bin directory and /usr/X11 for the X11
distribution only.
3) The main reason for /usr/X11R6 is tradition and, to some extend, easy
testing of later X releases (as moving to a new X version may be somewhat
more dangerous than other moves). User applications are probably still
compatible, and then it would be inconvenient to have them mixed with the X
distribution.
PS: It's okay if you don't agree with point 3) [I never made a move between X
releases personally].
> Long ago, in Slackware, I used to be able to "ls /usr/bin" and sometimes
> find the command-line tool I was looking for. Right now on my Debian
> system, there are 1134 files in there. That makes it pretty unmanageable.
> There are only 281 programs in /usr/bin/X11, so sometimes I can find
> something by searching through that.
This won't work with mixed programs, that run under X and console (and maybe
svga lib).
There are more efficient ways to find a program, for example "apropos".
> Now, organizing a whole class of files under /usr/X11R6 is a bit weird,
> along with the bunch of symlinks we use to keep it all straight
> (/usr/lib/X11, /usr/bin/X11, etc). I don't think those exist for any reason
> other than tradition. Changing it, however, would be a big PITA and make us
> incompatible with everyone else.
This is the issue that was discussed in debian-policy. But you are right,
it is a bit weired, and that probably means that it is preferable to keep
the size of /usr/X11R6 as low as sensible.
Thank you,
Marcus
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Reply to: