1 |
On Sunday 19 September 2004 7:50 pm, Thomas Weidner wrote: |
2 |
> I think all know /usr/qt and /usr/kde conflicts with the FHS, but it's |
3 |
> there in order to make it possible to have several versions of kde/qt |
4 |
> installed side by side. If there was a way to make qt and kde |
5 |
> installations FHS compilant without removing the possibility to have |
6 |
> several versions installed side by side,whould there be any interest to |
7 |
> add it to portage or want gentoo developers to stick with the current |
8 |
> solution? I know the current version works, but it conflicts with the |
9 |
> FHS (and therefore with the LSB). |
10 |
|
11 |
IIRC, having /mnt as anything but an empty directory conflicts with the FHS |
12 |
also. Gentoo uses /mnt as FHS's /media |
13 |
|
14 |
On Sunday 19 September 2004 8:16 pm, Dan Armak wrote: |
15 |
> The FHS says about /usr: "Large software packages must not use a direct |
16 |
> subdirectory under the /usr hierarchy." I agree this rules out what we're |
17 |
> doing. The problem is, noone ever proposed a better (more FHS-compliant) |
18 |
> solution. |
19 |
|
20 |
So is XFree86/X.org in violation of this also? |
21 |
|
22 |
On Sunday 19 September 2004 8:37 pm, Dan Armak wrote: |
23 |
> My point here is that kde itself is not special in any way (although qt |
24 |
> arguably is, since you do want different qt2 and qt3 programs side by side, |
25 |
> but then the qt libraries could live together in /usr with some effort). |
26 |
|
27 |
No need for such versioning of Qt 2 and 3 libs as far as I can tell. Isn't Qt |
28 |
3 binary compatible with 2? (note: this will soon change with Qt 4 not being |
29 |
compatible with either) |
30 |
-- |
31 |
Luke-Jr |
32 |
Developer, Utopios |
33 |
http://utopios.org/ |