Re: Why did I suggest /usr/lib/kde3 or /opt/kde3? (Re: What are Chris and Daniel actually going to do now?)
On Thursday 17 January 2002 16:10, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 04:57:33PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> > 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".
Icons are excatly the example that shows that /usr/share/kde* is
the wrong thing...
> I have no beef with this. This is the sort of sane suggestion I wish
> you'd come up with more frequently. I've always thought this should be
> done, as /usr/share is just too cluttered.
... Please don't do this. Please keep same logical things, like icons,
together. Otherwise searching for icons is a night mare. I've dirs get
too crowed use subdir like
That's okay but not optimal (IMO). KDE did the right thing (tm).
Below icons is hi/locolor, then size subdirs. Because KDE does
not care what kde package an icons comes from. In an ideal
Debian system it would be the same, KDE, Gnome, fvwm ... put
all their stuff together, because Debian does not care which
packages includes the icons. At least that is my dream everytime
the icons dialog pops up, and KDE has not the right one.
If one want a view on files by package nothing can do better than
the package tools. We don't need the filesystem for it. If one
wants a bigger groups add eg. tags to packages so one can do
apt-get update --tag kde -t unstable upgrade
dpkg --tag kde -l
Joe user looks for docs, icons, sounds ...
Keep it together and Joe user is happy.
Add good package tools and admin is happy.
If both are happy you are on a Debian system ;)
At least up to now. I hope it will not change.
To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is
a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated.
You discover truth everytime you use it.