Robert Collins wrote: > I'm agnostic on this one, I don't use X enough to really care. However, > Earnie has pointed out that extra path elements have a lamentable > performance impact, so perhaps we should be avoiding that?
Yeah, but X itself goes into /usr/X11R6/bin and that will never change. So systems with X will have /usr/bin and /usr/X11R6/bin in their PATH no matter what. So this is really a non-issue. However, as I stated earlier, RH and SuSe and Mandrake all put their X applications into /usr/bin (with the exceptions noted previously). > I'm 100% with you here. If it's a package, then it goes under release. > If we want a completely separate tree, create a new location and a new > setup.ini, and then that becomes the cygwin-xfree lists domain, and they > can have whatever policy they want. Whilst it's in the main setup.ini, > they need to follow the policies that this list has hammered out - with > much pain. I don't think there needs to be a *completely* separate tree. I was just saying this: release/cygwin release/zlib release/Xsomething/cgoban release/Xsomething/windowmaker release/Xsomething/lesstif release/XFree86/xfree86-base/ release/XFree86/xfree86-fonts/ release/XFree86/xfree86-.../ All under release. All follow the official rules for packaging. **EXCEPT** XFree86 itself is configured with --prefix=/usr/X11R6/ This has already been settled. **MAYBE** stuff that is X-linked (e.g. goes under release/Xsomething/) MIGHT be configured --prefix=/usr/X11R6/ IFF we amend the official rules to allow that. We have not yet done so, and might not do it ever. --Chuck
