Alternate Installation Prefixes [Was: Re: Gnome-2.28.0 build notes -- Compatability Symlinks]

Guy Dalziel krendoshazin at dementedfury.org
Sat Oct 24 09:01:11 PDT 2009


On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:52:36AM -0500, DJ Lucas wrote:
> I've hinted at this suggestion before, and mulled this over for a while 
> now.  I'm now suggesting that BLFS no longer support the alternate 
> installation prefixes for X, Gnome, and KDE.  The alternate prefixes can 
> be supported by the wiki if people are willing to commit to it.
> 
> What does everyone else think of this?

Regardless of what the standard becomes I will continue to use /usr/X11.
I've had absolutely no problems with compiling anything against it, and
it keeps my system far tidier than it would be if I put it in /usr. Plus
the fact that I can test a version of X by putting it in /usr/X11, and
then just wipe out /usr/X11 when I'm done with it; it's simple, clean, and
much more preferable to myself.
  As far as X goes I say that we support alternate prefixes since it's
no hassle to do so. But if Gnome and KDE are a major hassle then let's
make our lives easier and drop support for it. Personally I hate putting
anything in /opt as I feel that the root system should remain fairly
static.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-dev/attachments/20091024/98805c6f/attachment.sig>


More information about the blfs-dev mailing list