I'm starting to gather my data to update the gnome2 packages that I
said I cared about.  The first of these is libbonobo (currently
2.32.1) and I've immediately hit a snag.  At the moment it uses
--sysconfdir=/etc/gnome-2.30.2 - this is the gnome-etc-dir entity.
Now that we are eventually going to move to gnome3, I see a number
of options for dealing with this entity.

1. Create a new gnome2-etc-dir entity for the legacy gnome2 packages
that are going to remain in the book until packages such as abiword
and gnumeric have stable releases for gnome3.  I suggest a value of
/etc/gnome-2.32 (a third level for legacy packages doesn't make much
sense to me), or even /etc/gnome2 or /etc/gnome-2.

 Doing this would mean that the other gnome2 packages in the book
that use sysconfdir (e.g. the old version of evince) would still
point to /etc/gnome-2.30.2.

2. Change the value of gnome-etc-dir to /etc/gnome-2.32 and create a
placeholder gnome3-etc-dir of /etc/gnome-3.2 - doing that would mean
extra work for whoever merges the gnome-3 packages.  Also, there is
no guarantee that any of the other old gnome-2 packages still build,
so making an update that changes them to use /etc/gnome-2.32 might
mislead users.

3. Change gnome-etc-dir to just /etc/gnome : this happens to match
what I do in my own builds (so, its known to work with a mix of
gnome2 and gnome3 packages).

 But, I've never really understood why BLFS went into 3 levels of
/etc/gnome-x.y.z in the first place - it might keep a few sysconf
files separated when moving from y to y+2, but it does nothing about
separating the old and new versions of programs and libraries.

 So, my own preference is for /etc/gnome, or failing that to move
the legacy packages I mentioned the other day to using /etc/gnome2
or -2 or -2.32.  But what do other people, particularly dj and
Wayne, think about this ?

ĸen
-- 
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to