Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 05:50:31PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> My only concern is to keep something like the /etc directory at a
>> reasonable number of entries. Right now I have 90. Compare that to
>> ubuntu that has 217 or RHEL with 199. I think of the /etc directory as
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 05:50:31PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> My only concern is to keep something like the /etc directory at a
> reasonable number of entries. Right now I have 90. Compare that to
> ubuntu that has 217 or RHEL with 199. I think of the /etc directory as
> a place where I m
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On my partial-gnome installation (apart from the gnome2 packages
> previously mentioned, I built gcalctool, gucharmap,
> epiphany{,-extensions}, gstreamer/plugins, totem, yelp from 3.2 -
> plus their many required dependencies) I have the following
> directories in /etc/gnome:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:46:14PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
>
> > I don't see Gnome as a package. GConf is a package, libgnome is a package,
> > Gnome is a Suite of packages.
>
> That's true AFAICT. In fact, I was looking at the Gnome sources
> yesterday at http://ftp.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:58:55PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
>
> > Just looking at my gnome 2.30.2 installation. You can also argue that
> > having /etc/gnome is not compliant because it has dbus in two locations
> > /etc/gnome/2.30.2/dbus-1 and /etc/dbus-1.
>
> Are they
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:58:55 -0600
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> In /etc/dbus-1 I have:
>
>session.conf session.d system.conf system.d
>
> where the two directories are empty.
Incidentally, even though /etc/dbus-1/session.d is empty, dbus won't
work if it doesn't exist.
Andy
--
http://linuxfro
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
> Just looking at my gnome 2.30.2 installation. You can also argue that
> having /etc/gnome is not compliant because it has dbus in two locations
> /etc/gnome/2.30.2/dbus-1 and /etc/dbus-1.
Are they the same? In /etc/dbus-1 I have:
session.conf session.d system.conf
On 21/12/11 07:22, Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
>> Only issue is the FHS says that if possible *always* keep
>> same-package sysconf data in a subdirectory of /etc. Such
>> as /etc/gnome.
> I don't see Gnome as a package. GConf is a package, libgnome is a package,
> Gnome is a Suite of packages.
> J
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
> On 21/12/11 05:36, Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> On 12/20/2011 11:24 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> Andrew Benton wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:10:48 +1100
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
> My preference is option 4) /etc (Something that Fedora and Ubuntu uses,
> just
On 21/12/11 05:36, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> On 12/20/2011 11:24 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Andrew Benton wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:10:48 +1100
>>> Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
>>>
My preference is option 4) /etc (Something that Fedora and Ubuntu uses,
just to name a few)
>>>
>>> +1 for t
On 12/20/2011 3:10 AM, Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
> As in my version of the book, (Option 5) I opted to have a
> $GNOME_SYSCONFDIR variable rather than a semi hard coded path. That way,
> the user can decide what path they choose to use, just like with
> $GNOME_PREFIX.
I also think this is good. All t
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:59:31 -0600
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Doesn't --sysconfdir=/etc imply /etc/gnome? I thought the problem was
>> moving it away from /usr/etc/gnome.
>
> It's /etc/gconf
That's fine.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:59:31 -0600
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Doesn't --sysconfdir=/etc imply /etc/gnome? I thought the problem was
> moving it away from /usr/etc/gnome.
It's /etc/gconf
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> On 12/20/2011 11:24 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Andrew Benton wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:10:48 +1100
>>> Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
>>>
My preference is option 4) /etc (Something that Fedora and Ubuntu uses,
just to name a few)
>>> +1 for this. I install my gconf
On 12/20/2011 11:24 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:10:48 +1100
>> Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
>>
>>> My preference is option 4) /etc (Something that Fedora and Ubuntu uses,
>>> just to name a few)
>>
>> +1 for this. I install my gconf stuff --sysconfdir=/etc
>
>
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:10:48 +1100
> Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
>
>> My preference is option 4) /etc (Something that Fedora and Ubuntu uses,
>> just to name a few)
>
> +1 for this. I install my gconf stuff --sysconfdir=/etc
I agree.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:10:48 +1100
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
> My preference is option 4) /etc (Something that Fedora and Ubuntu uses,
> just to name a few)
+1 for this. I install my gconf stuff --sysconfdir=/etc
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxf
On 20/12/11 11:46, Ken Moffat wrote:
> I'm starting to gather my data to update the gnome2 packages that I
.
>
> 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,
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
19 matches
Mail list logo