Alternate Installation Prefixes [Was: Re: Gnome-2.28.0 build notes -- Compatability Symlinks]
dj at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Oct 24 12:00:14 PDT 2009
On 10/24/2009 11:20 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> DJ Lucas wrote:
>> 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.
<Snip comments by Randy, Guy, Bruce, and Ken>
OK, I think Guy and Ken see my point WRT Gnome. I honestly don't know
about KDE, and X really isn't a big issue...it's the packages that don't
want to use pkgconfig to find X. Gnome specifically is a pain. For
instance, I'm now getting the gvfs issue (Computer: Trash:///, etc...),
this problem only existed in previous 2.26.3 because of a lack of gvfs.
After reading Lars's message about the symlinks, I now know the problem
without having put any time into solving it, but hacking up the
autotools scripts will be a pain. Though I haven't given him time to
comment yet, I'd be willing to bet that Wayne has no issue with the
icons on a /usr only installation.
My point is, that with the hacks that are being used to make Gnome work
in /opt, there are a lot of items that should be separated that are
not...and even in modifying other packages (udev and hal)....though
there may be ways around that. Anyway, I'm due for a rebuild as I had
inadvertently used SVN instead of 6.4 on my test partition, and Xorg-7.5
(mostly) and Gnome 2.28.1 are out. Curiosity, what is the probability
of LFS-6.5 or LFS-7.0 before a BLFS release? I'm guessing pretty high
if LFS avoids multi-lib for this release.
-- DJ Lucas
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
More information about the blfs-dev