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

Re: mh-e for emacs-snapshot and icon images directory

Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com> writes:

> Just out of curiosity, what's the difference between /usr/share/icons
> and /usr/share/pixmaps? I couldn't find anything in either the FHS or
> Debian policy docs.

/usr/share/pixmaps is the traditional location, /usr/share/icons is a
new fd.o-mandated directory so some GNOME stuff uses it... see

    <URL: http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/latest/>

There's also a /usr/share/images created by desktop-base.  It's a bit of
a mess.

> If two packages refer to the same file, they mean to share it.

I was referring to Debian packages, not Emacs packages; not all packages
are maintained in Emacs.  This is, as I said, theoretical at the moment

> Please see

>   http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/emacs/emacs/etc/images/

> for the current image structure in Emacs itself.

I'm aware of it, I fixed make-dist after you moved the images there,
remember? :-)

> In summary, etc/images/mh-e is inconsistent with CVS Emacs and with the
> Gnus Debian package. The rationale for it is based upon a concern that
> no longer exists with current Emacs policy.

Perhaps you're right, I'm not sure if gnus installs its images there to
follow the Emacs layout, or to avoid cluttering a shared directory.  My
gut feeling is that installing loads of images from different Debian
packages under /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/etc/images isn't very clean.

You obviously feel very strongly about this issue, and I don't think
it's vitally important anyway.  Do as you please.

 : :' :        Romain Francoise <rfrancoise@debian.org>
 `. `'         http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/

Reply to: