Re: Why did I suggest /usr/lib/kde3 or /opt/kde3? (Re: What are Chris and Daniel actually going to do now?)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thursday 17 January 2002 16:12, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Your original complaint was about cluttering the namespace. With this
> solution, not only are you implementing TWO ugly hacks (the
> /usr/lib/kde3 prefix and /usr/bin symlinks), but the namespace stays
/usr/lib/kde3 isn't an ugly hack. why, then large packages which have their
file hierarchies in /usr/lib/<package> implementing an ugly hack? that's not
/usr/bin symlinks doesn't seem very good to me either. another solution is to
write a wrapper script that prepends the required path (startkde3).
there should be a single entry point to using KDE3. that way, you can choose
running kde3 or not in the beginning (which is a good thing), KDE2 apps would
continue running the same way.
you would simply move the binaries to /usr/bin which would be the cleanest...
wait, you can't symlink or copy KDE3 binaries to /usr/bin anyway, if you want
to keep KDE2 and KDE3 together. Yes, you can use the autoconf trick to
prepend all binary names with "kde3_" but that's even worse.
Chris, have you been able to provide a set of KDE3 packages that do not kill
I suggest you to at least implement: "/usr/share/kde3" under which all KDE3
ro arch indep data should go in such as "/usr/share/kde/icons".
Second suggestion is to implement "/usr/lib/kde3" and append the path to
/etc/ld.so.conf like the atlas package does. It's the nicest way to handle
that large collection of libraries.
Eray Ozkural (exa) <email@example.com>
Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara
GPG public key fingerprint: 360C 852F 88B0 A745 F31B EA0F 7C07 AE16 874D 539C
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----