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
anyway.
> 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: