Re: Relocatability of packages

[Tim Moore <tmoore tembel org>]

On Thu, 24 Sep 1998, David Jeske wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 1998 at 01:20:48PM -0500, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
[snip]
> When I think of relocatility of packages I think of getting rid of this:
> 
> /usr/local/bin/balsa
> /usr/local/bin/wmprefs
> /usr/local/balsa/balsa.ico
> /usr/local/wmprefs.app/<stuff>
> 
> and moving to this:
> 
> <anypath>/balsa.app/balsa
>                    /balsa.ico
> <anypath>/wmprefs.app/wmprefs
>                      /wmprefs.ico
> 

So does that mean you have to put every *.app directory (which may be
scattered around the system) in your path? Wouldn't building menus for the
GNOMEprint and whatever be a big headache? And what about the separation
of system-independent vs. system-dependent data?

It was kind of cool the way NEXTSTEP encapsulated a package in a
directory, but I don't think it always scales well, or that it works in
all situations. I think that modern package managers do a good job at
solving the same problem without imposing their own structure on the
filesystem.

Tim