Re: [Muine] MonoConventions

[Link Dupont <link subpop net>]

I agree that its a bit odd, but these seem to be the only set of
documents detailing how to make Mono/C# apps FHS compliant. I've heard
that the upstream Mono authors aren't really concerned about FHS
standards and such. Frankly, I'm totally okay with the format that
Muine's installed with right now. But I may be forced to patch it to
comply with some Debian standards in the future.

On Fri, 2004-04-09 at 23:59 +0200, Jorn Baayen wrote:

> Seems a bit odd to me, but if this is the new standard, I won't
> complain. Patches welcome. :)
> 
> Jorn
> 
> On Fri, 2004-04-09 at 13:27 -0700, Link Dupont wrote:
> 
> > Based off a discussion I've been having with Mirco (the Debian gtk-sharp
> > maintainer), I would like to propose conforming the Muine install
> > locations to the MonoConventions. Currently, code is placed in /usr/lib,
> > which has traditionally been for architecture dependent libraries. Most
> > Mono applications are not architecture dependent, and therefore
> > shouldn't be placed in /usr/lib (to be FHS compliant). Debian has
> > written up an alternate scheme for its packaging[1] that seems to me to
> > be a bit more logical.
> > Does this format jive with anyone? Is this worth spending time doing?
> > 
> > 1: http://wiki.debian.net/index.cgi?MonoConventions
> > -- 
> > Link Dupont <link subpop net>
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > muine-list mailing list
> > muine-list gnome org
> > http://lists.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/muine-list
> 
> _______________________________________________
> muine-list mailing list
> muine-list gnome org
> http://lists.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/muine-list
-- 
Link Dupont <link subpop net>