Re: GNOME 2.0 Desktop 'Alpha' Release

[Laszlo PETER <Laszlo Peter ireland sun com>]

Hi,

jacob berkman wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 2002-01-11 at 12:29, Jonathan Blandford wrote:
> > Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc linuxweasel com> writes:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2002-01-10 at 09:02, Matthew J. Doller wrote:
> > > > if binary rpms are made available, would it be possible to have them be
> > > > relocatable?  if i'm going to install an alpha of gnome2, i'd like it to
> > > > go into /opt, or /opt/gnome2
> > >
> > > Well, theoretically, the RPMS are relocatable.  However, since there are
> > > current docs on relocating RPMs, these aren't tested.  If you want to
> > > test this feel free, and let me know where things break, and I'll see
> > > what I can fix.
> > >     Greg
> >
> > Unfortunately, we compile the location a program is installed into in
> > libgnome, meaning that RPM is unrelocatable, even if the files are.
> 
> i umm thought this was supposed to be fixed in gnome 2.

Actually, there are a lot of absolute paths fixed in the binaries at
build time. For example:

	- locale directory
	- icon/pixmap directory
	- configuration files ($prefix/etc, $prefix/share)

It would be nice to change these to relative paths based on the location
of the binary or some magic environment variable.

Laca
_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers