Subject: Re: /usr/X11R6/xxx vs /usr/xxx/X11 (Was: Bug#3290)

From: Yves Arrouye <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 23:23:16 +0200

On Jul 19, 10:41pm, Ian Jackson wrote:
} Subject: Re: Bug#3290: (no subject)
} Yves Arrouye writes ("Re: Bug#3290: (no subject)"):
} > [...] (by the way, it should  be /usr/X11R6/bin, not /usr/bin/X).
} 
} No, it should be /usr/bin/X11.  This is to that when we have X11R7 it
} will work correctly.

I don't know what to think then: I thought it should be that, but then
there was a lot of mail telling that using /usr/bin/X11 caused problems.
Maybe this kind of stuff could go in the guidelines, just to have a
single way of doing things?

Yves.

--

---

From: Rob Browning <[email-masked]>
Date: 22 Jul 1996 18:43:17 -0500

> there was a lot of mail telling that using /usr/bin/X11 caused problems.

Perhaps you are thinking of the problems people were reporting with
/usr/X11, not /usr/bin/X11.  I don't recall any problems with
/usr/bin/X11.

--
Rob

---

From: "James A. Robinson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 20:12:14 -0400

> single way of doing things?

What Ian was saying was that scripts which generate paths and stuff
should use /usr/bin/X11, this is so that people with R5, R6, or R7 can
have a link in /usr/bin to the X11 bin directory they want as the
default X tree.

Now, if you _install_ or _modify_ binaries from Rx, where x is 5, 6,
or 7, you need to work under /usr/X11Rx.  This is because you know
where the main tree for this version of X is, but you have no way of
knowing where /usr/bin/X11 is pointing to.

Jim

---

From: [email-masked] (Bernd Eckenfels)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 01:59:56 +0200 (MET DST)

> single way of doing things?

Install in /usr/X11R6/bin/ and access in /usr/bin/X11/.

Greetings
Bernd