On Monday 09 January 2006 05:30, Felix Schulte wrote: > On 1/9/06, Egbert Eich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Julien Lafon writes: > > > It does not sound not logical to me - Xprint DDX is no physical > > > hardware so why should it be tagged as such? > > > > Neither is vfb or nest. > > 'hw' is really the wrong name here. It's historical. > > Better would be 'ddx'.
Alternatively: Yes, it is, Xprint talks to printer hardware. > I do not want the Xprint files moved except hw/ gets renamed to ddx/ > first (I wish this hw/ --> ddx/ rename would have been done during > monolithic-->modular transition as the issue seems to be known since > some time... :-(). DDX is a misnomer too really, most of the DDXes have OS-interface bits that aren't device-dependent but rather platform-dependent, and core logic glue that's more or less common to all the DDXes. But this is missing the point. Regardless of what the directory is named, we're building N-1 servers under hw/ and 1 server under Xprint. The hw/ directory contains all of the code that is specific to given classes of output devices, _except_ the Xprint code. In other words, moving Xprint to hw/Xprint fixes layout; moving hw/ to ddx/ substitutes one bad name for another. - ajax
pgpYmJlPvX8jI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Xprint mailing list [email protected] http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/xprint
