On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 04:36:08PM -0700, John Hein wrote: > One of the issues with 'alternatives' implementations is that they are > not selectable per-user (including non superuser). > > In this particular case (libGL), also what about the native X server > vs. virtual X servers that support using the mesa lib (per-application > selection)? > > In addition to something like alternatives, another option is to allow > installation of conflicting files (like libGL.so in this case) to > separate directories and specify which to use using a path (like > LD_LIBRARY_PATH or rpath at compile time). That can help with the > aforementioned per-user and per-application variation. > > Personally, I prefer the "path" method over something like alternative > sym links (e.g., debian/redhat alternatives). There can still be a > front-end tool to get at the "alternates" configuration information, > but I like the ability to set a path rather than a sym link.
I tend to agree. While I currently do not see clearly the best solution to the problem, when I see "etc/alternative.d" I want to unsee it ASAP. For nvidia driver, it might be easier to simply provide a knob in xorg-server and libGL and perhaps register a dependency on nvidia-driver; no need to invent some cumbersome framework. ./danfe _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"