Bug#91257: PROPOSED] changes to X font policy
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 03:57:37AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 06:29:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 03:08:30AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > * Some rewording to reflect the new must/should/may policy.
> > This seems like a good idea, but why is the alternative unacceptable
> > (must instead of should)?
> Let's say my X server is configured thus:
>
> Section "Files"
> RgbPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/rgb"
> FontPath "big-honkin-font-server.mycompany.com:7100"
> EndSection
>
> I install dosemu, which contains this MS-DOS console thing, and ships a
> "vga" X font for the purpose. Dosemu doesn't work.
The same thing would occur if the .deb you'd installed hadn't contained
the fonts.
Certainly, having split packages would make it *easier* to cope with this,
and that's a good reason to make it policy, but it's not enough of a reason
to remove dosemu from the distribution. IMO.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Reply to: