Re: [gentoo-dev] Programs that depend on X libraries

[Mikael Hallendal]

ons 2001-08-29 klockan 19.01 skrev Aron Griffis:
> Hello,

Hi!

> I'd like to propose that programs should almost always install in /usr
> rather than /usr/X11R6.  My reasons follow:

I'm not really sure where I stand in this discussion yet :)
(I think I agree with you though)

First of all, I want to enlighten people not used to BSD that there is
another way. BSDs (at least NetBSD, think the others does this too)
installes everything not in the base-system in it's own directory
(/usr/pkg/ on NetBSD). This is a nice solution IMHO since it keeps /usr
"clean". This is a feature many people bring up as one of the better
things in the Linux vs. *BSD. Might be worth a thought.

> (1) The FHS says: "This hierarchy is reserved for the X Window System,
>     version 11 release 6, and related files."  IMHO that doesn't include
>     programs that are linked against the X libraries, just programs that
>     are delivered with the X distribution.

This is a good reason for not installing in /usr/X11R6.
 
> (2) Consistency with other major distributions.  Both Red Hat and Debian
>     install programs (even those linked against X libraries) in /usr.
>     (For the most part... Deviations seem to be primarily historical.)

I don't think this weights in so much. We are pretty different from the
other distributions and tries to do the stuff the way we think is best.
This argument should (IMHO) only be used where it really doesn't matter
to us.
 
> (3) Simplicity in the ebuilds.  Consider the following scenarios:
>
>     * ebuild with multiple binaries, some of which link against X,
>       others that don't.  Does the ebuild author split up the binaries?
>       If so, this becomes confusing to both the ebuild author (who has
>       to go through and distinguish one from the other) and to the
>       end-user (who might expect both prog and xprog to live in the same
>       location).
>
>     * ebuild with binary that optionally links to X.  Does the ebuild
>       author put conditionals in the ebuild to install in either
>       /usr/X11R6 or /usr?  If so, this again creates a confusing
>       situation for the end-user.
>
>     In both of these cases, it's easier to install to /usr and not worry
>     about either of the above.

Yes, this is the reason I think is worse the most. I really don't like
the install-in-different-paths-depending-on-whats-it-linked-against.

This is the same with GNOME. Like XChat, if it's compiled with
GNOME-support it's installed in /opt/gnome and if it's not it's
installed in /usr/X11R6 (and with current setup, it should be added a
text-only version which should go into /usr).

Another issue about this is even worse. How about libraries?
gdk-pixbuf can optionally be built with GNOME-support. Currently (to
follow current guidelines) I install it in /opt/gnome if it's built with
GNOME-support and in /usr/X11R6 otherwise.
This is _NOT_ good because I think ebuild-writers shouls be able to know
in which prefix other packages are installed in (especially libs because
they might have to give that as an option to there packages).

> (4) Potential to have multiple X distributions installed.  Say for
>     instance that I like to have XFree86-3.3.6, XFree86-4.0.1, and
>     Accelerated-X installed.  I might like to install these in
>     hierarchies under /usr/XFree86-3.3.6, /usr/XFree86-4.0.1, and
>     /usr/Accel-X, then create a symlink /usr/X11R6 that points to the
>     tree I'm using at the moment.  All other technical concerns with
>     this scheme aside, this at least creates a problem for ebuilds that
>     like to install in /usr/X11R6.

This however is (I think) something that speeks for actually installing
into /usr/X11R6. Because an app compiled against XFree86 3.3.6 or
Accel-X might not work without recompile against XFree86 4.0.1. (I'm not
sure about this).

So if we by changing the /usr/X11R6-link break lots of packages
installed it's better if they are installed in the old path so they
won't be found or something.

Regards,
  Mikael Hallendal

-- 

Mikael Hallendal
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team Leader
CodeFactory AB, Stockholm, Sweden