Re: An alternatives question
On Wed, Apr 01, 1998 at 09:22:29AM -0500, Brian Mays wrote:
> Where should the links in /etc/alternatives point for X applications?
> Should they point to /usr/bin/X11/app-name or /usr/X11R6/bin/app-name?
> I can find nothing in Debian's policy manual that addresses this issue,
> and there currently are at least two open bug reports (20407 and 20409)
> on this.
I think I opened four bug reports on it (rxvt, xv, xpdf, something else -
maybe xlockmore-gl. I can't see any problem with using the "proper" name,
and is more consistent. In particular the packages *apart* from rxvt don't
seem to have much of a case:
[2]wyvern:/var/lib/dpkg/info$ grep /usr/bin/X11/ *
rxvt.postinst:update-alternatives --install /usr/bin/X11/rxvt rxvt \
rxvt.postinst: /usr/bin/X11/rxvt-xterm 30
rxvt.postinst:update-alternatives --install /usr/bin/X11/rxvt rxvt \
rxvt.postinst: /usr/bin/X11/rxvt-xpm 20
rxvt.postinst:update-alternatives --install /usr/bin/X11/rclock rclock \
rxvt.postinst: /usr/bin/X11/rclock-std 30
rxvt.prerm: update-alternatives --remove rxvt /usr/bin/X11/rxvt-xterm
rxvt.prerm: update-alternatives --remove rxvt /usr/bin/X11/rxvt-xpm
rxvt.prerm: update-alternatives --remove rclock /usr/bin/X11/rclock-std
xlockmore-gl.postinst: chgrp shadow /usr/bin/X11/xlock
xlockmore-gl.postinst: chmod 2755 /usr/bin/X11/xlock
xlockmore-gl.postinst: chmod u+s /usr/bin/X11/xlock
xpdf.postinst: --view="/usr/bin/X11/xpdf %s" --test='test
"$DISPLAY" != ""'
xv.postinst: --view="/usr/bin/X11/xv %s"; \
> It is my opinion that the alternatives link should be through
> /usr/bin/X11; otherwise when X is upgraded to X11R7, all of the
> alternatives will break. However, I would like to hear what others think.
It seems odd to me that we refer to it in /usr/bin/X11 even though it is in
/usr/X11R6/bin. I can't see that much difference between this and having
mail programs use /usr/spool/mail rather than /var/spool/mail.
What would happen in the (unlikely) event that X11R7 comes
out - wouldn't things break farily badly anyway because of lines like this:
update-alternatives --install /usr/bin/X11/rxvt rxvt \
/usr/bin/X11/rxvt-xpm 20
I don't understand the update-alternatives and won't pretend to, but it
seems that at least the second line could cause problems. What would happen
if someone did this:
update-alternatives --install /usr/X11R6/bin/rxvt rxvt \
/usr/bin/X11/rxvt-xpm 20
The bit of fsstnd says this - note the start of the second paragraph,
althought I'd much rather follow something sensible if the fsstnd is "wrong"
on this point.
-----
To simplify matters and make XFree86 more compatible with the X Window
System on other systems, the following symbolic links should be present:
/usr/bin/X11 -> /usr/X11R6/bin
/usr/lib/X11 -> /usr/X11R6/lib/X11
/usr/include/X11 -> /usr/X11R6/include/X11
In general, software should not be installed or managed via the above
symbolic links. They are intended for utilization by users only. The
difficulty is related to the release version of the X Window System --
in transitional periods, it is impossible to know what release of X11 is
in use. For the same reason, there should not be a symbolic link from
/usr/X11 pointing to the current X Window System hierarchy.
------
Adrian
email: adrian.bridgett@poboxes.com | Debian Linux - www.debian.org
http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett | 2.0 release soon - over 1800
PGP key available on public key servers | packages on a stable OS
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: