On 11/3/05, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 03.11.05 um 10:44 Uhr schrieb Chris B. Vetter: > > Hello @list, > > has anyone tried to bend the settings of GNUSTEP_XXX_ROOT such that > > the GNUstep folders reflect the folder structure of OS X? > > That is, for example instead of .../Local/Applications/ and > > .../System/Applications/ just have ONE .../Applications/ (one > > .../Library/ and so on). > > Would there be any (negative) implications if you'd do so? > I am for keeping the different domains (user, local, network) if you > ask me (did you?) since it allows a fine grained supply of > applications. As Einstein said: "make it as simple as possible but not > simpler"
For clarification: I do/did NOT ask to have /Local and /System officially removed. I figured that since there is a system-wide GNUstep.conf that sets GNUSTEP_XXX_ROOT, it would be an idea to play around with a more OSX'ish setup -- on a personal setup. After all, I guess that's (sortof) what GNUstep.conf is for, right? :-) The question would be, IF you do that, what the implications would be. As Alex P. already pointed out, some developers hard-code paths (baaad idea) but other than that, is there anything else? Basically, does GNUstep itself rely on a specific file/folder structure? Frankly, I do not see a real point in having /Local/Applications AND /System/Applications. There IS a point, however, with respect to /Network/Applications. But as Yves points out, having several Applications folder (local to a particular machine) is kinda awkward. On a side-note, since a user can use ~/.GNUstep.conf it would also be possible to mimick the OSX'ish user home folder structure. If you're not familiar with OS X' folder structure, take a look at eg. http://osx.hyperjeff.net/Reference/fileStructureXServer2.php to see what I'm talking about. Cheers, -- Chris _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
