Re: new cygwin package: cgoban

[Charles Wilson <cwilson at ece dot gatech dot edu>]

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> This wasn't entirely correct.  The package name for XFree86-base
> was "Xfree86-base".  Also, I would prefer if packages that relied
> on X were put in the XFree86 hierarchy.


Also, Trevor Forbes suggested that X-dependent programs should be 
compiled using --prefix=/usr/X11R6/ (and --sysconfdir=/etc/X11/ ?), as 
is common on unix systems...

Volker Zell agreed.  Nobody else responded.  I kinda like it, but FHS 
has moved away from that; now on Red Hat systems it appears that ONLY 
those programs specifically part of XFree86 are included there -- or 
programs whose purpose is to manipulate XFree86 itself (like third-party 
Xconfigurators and such).

Similarly, I don't like the restriction that all 'X'-based packages go 
under XFree86/ on sourceware.  We don't put inetutils underneath 
ncurses/.  We don't put openssh under openssl/.

If you really want to segregate X apps, create another tree: Xopt/ or 
something (and give Harold "official" control of that tree, too).  I 
think XFree86/ should be reserved for the XFree86 distribution itself.

I'd like to see a definitive answer to both of these questions, tho, 
before we get too many X programs in the distribution...
   1) --prefix=/usr/X11R6/
   2) packages uploaded under XFree86/

--Chuck