[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: PROPSAL: making xaw-wrappers not divert

On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Joey Hess wrote:

Well, I'm on holiday in Budapest at the momoment. So I cannot actually do
anything right now.

On the other hand, I read yuo message, and it seems OK with me.

(Will be away till at least 1999/4/21)


> Xaw-wrappers serves a useful purpose, but it accomplishes it in a convoluted
> fashion, by using dpkg-divert. This has led to lots of bugs, some of them
> quite complex, over the past few years. It is possible to do away with the
> need for xaw-wrappers to divert other packages' files. But I can't do this
> without the help and cooperation of the people whose packages are affected
> by xaw-wrappers. I've cc'd everyone.
> First, an overview of how it works now. Xaw library packages that break some
> programs use xaw-wrappers to divert those programs, and replace them with a
> link to xaw-wrappers' wrapper script, which when run, twiddles the
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH appropriatly and runs the diverted program. Also, some
> packages (axe, freeciv, v-bin, xrn, xfig, xkeycaps, xxgbd) register file in
> them with xaw-wrappers. The programs that the xaw libraries forcibly
> register with xaw-wrappers are these:
> xcolorsel
> xconsole
> xdvi.bin
> oxdvi.bin
> What I propose to do is change xaw-wrappers so it no longer diverts files.
> If a file needs to be wrapped with xaw-wrappers, the package that it is in
> will be responsible for moving the file to "filename.real", and making
> "filename" be a symlink to /usr/lib/xaw-wrappers/wrapper, and placing an
> xaw-wrappers control file in /usr/lib/xaw-wrappers/conf/. 
> The package will also have to depend on xaw-wrappers. (I'm sure that will be
> the controversial bit, if anything. :-)
> That means that the packages containing the programs listed above will need
> to be changed. If those of you I've cc'd this to are ameanable to this idea,
> I'd like to get started on doing this. Please reply and let me know what you
> think.
> -- 
> see shy jo

Reply to: