[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: mozilla problems



On Sat, Sep 26, 1998 at 03:10:17PM -0500, john@dhh.gt.org wrote:

> Michael Meskes writes:
> > So could anyone tell me why a binary that only runs under X has to be
> > under /usr/bin?
> 
> Can you tell me why (other than tradition) it should be anywhere else?
> 
> > ...I'd like to see software that depends on X to be under /usr/X11R6,...
> 
> I presume, then, that you would like to see software that depends on perl
> be under /usr/perl5?  What will you do with software that depends on both
> X and perl?

I like the /usr/bin/X11 directory myself, because I think of command-line
tools and graphical applications as very different beasts.  /usr/bin
contains almost entirely command-line tools; /usr/bin/X11 contains almost
entirely applications.  It's a shame I have to say "almost" there, but the
placement of many programs is pretty arbitrary.

Long ago, in Slackware, I used to be able to "ls /usr/bin" and sometimes
find the command-line tool I was looking for.  Right now on my Debian
system, there are 1134 files in there.  That makes it pretty unmanageable. 
There are only 281 programs in /usr/bin/X11, so sometimes I can find
something by searching through that.

Now, organizing a whole class of files under /usr/X11R6 is a bit weird,
along with the bunch of symlinks we use to keep it all straight
(/usr/lib/X11, /usr/bin/X11, etc).  I don't think those exist for any reason
other than tradition.  Changing it, however, would be a big PITA and make us
incompatible with everyone else.

Have fun,

Avery


Reply to: