[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: No to StowFS!

From: Michael Heath
Subject: Re: No to StowFS!
Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 00:01:07 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)

The current plan takes a package and makes it's bin/ directory appear
to be included in /bin, takes the package's usr/ directory and makes
it appear to be included in /usr, and so on. What he's saying is,
rather than doing this, you should just have a utility that keeps the
PATH environment variable updated (by adding hte packages' bin/ and
sbin/ directories), updates ld.so.conf, and so on.

Richard M. Stallman wrote:

> when you build a program to work on an directory, all that you will
> need from that package is the binary location.
> I do not understand any of that. I think you need to give labels
> to the various entities that you are talking about, and describe
> their relationships clearly.
> What you will need is, instead stowfs, that get package/bin and
> merge it on /bin, is a translator that gets package/bin and put it
> on PATH. The same is valid for /lib and /sbin (I know no variable
> to set "include" directories).
> That is very vague, so I don't see how it differs from our present
> plans.
> _______________________________________________ gnu-system-discuss
> mailing list gnu-system-discuss@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-system-discuss

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]