Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Tue, 27 Feb 2001 10:35:11 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: fpTeX and Cygwin
Message-ID:	<20010227103511.A10525@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20010226175349 DOT R27406 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <000f01c0a067$0c9ceb60$3bc1c13f AT holstein-mobile DOT ASPECTDV DOT COM> <20010226225233 DOT A8069 AT redhat DOT com> <3A9B3572 DOT 8CB71CB5 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010227001835 DOT A8605 AT redhat DOT com> <20010227111102 DOT B27406 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<20010227111102.B27406@cygbert.vinschen.de>; from cygwin@cygwin.com on Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 11:11:02AM +0100

On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 11:11:02AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 12:18:36AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 12:04:50AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> >Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >>I think that this will still be a "contrib" package and, as such, it
>> >>should still live in /usr/local.
>> >
>> >Whoah! None of my packages in contrib install into /usr/local.  The
>> >original motivation behind the "contrib" directory was not "stuff for
>> >/usr/local." We first created "contrib" and moved zlib and libpng into
>> >it from "latest" because.  Wait.  Why did we do that again?
>> 
>> Hmm.  I thought that this was always the understanding.  Corinna's ssh
>> stuff went in /usr/local until it was put into latest but...  hmm...  it
>> never existed in contrib or latest.  It was in an external site.
>> 
>> I guess I'd like some clear distinction on a user's disk for what is
>> "contributed" (and therfore optional) and what is not.  The user has
>> no easy way of knowing that something comes from a contrib directory
>> so the only vague hint he'll get will be directory structure.
>
>I don't follow this argumentation. Regardless how the package is
>queezed into an order in the download directory hirarchy it should
>always be installed in the prefix=/usr part of the users machine.
>
>The /usr/local is what the name suggests: It's what the user has
>additionally locally installed. The /usr part is what is part of
>the distro. And the contrib packages _are_ part of the distro.

They are contributed, unsupported parts of the distribution.  I
think that the local directory layout should reflect that.

Why do we even have a "contrib" directory, then?  It is completely
transparent to the user.  The only thing we can say is "Oh yeah, well
it's not supported! Check it out for yourself by using your ftp client
to go to ftp.sources.redhat.com and you'll see! So there!"

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -