https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=223524 ------- Comment #19 from andreas.hanke@gmx-topmail.de 2006-11-27 11:55 MST ------- Do you really want to add an /usr/X11 -> /usr symlink now? What will happen is exacty what happens about /boot/grub: There will be bug reports of the sense "what's the purpose of these 42 nested directories with the same content". /usr/bin/X11 -> /usr/bin is probably OK because users rarely look at /usr/bin (it's scary anyway) and /usr/bin/X11 was explicitly mentioned as a path that users can rely upon in FHS 2.3. But /usr/X11 -> /usr is something I tend to find really ugly. I'll attach a screenshot. And /usr/X11 wasn't a supported entry point in FHS 2.3, it's not mentioned a single time there. I wonder who used it and why this compatibility symlink should be needed, given that it was never FHS-blessed. FHS 2.3 says: /usr/bin/X11 is what users should use for binaries (now fixed with a symlink to /usr/bin) /usr/lib/X11 is what users should use instead of /usr/X11R6/lib/X11 (no need to fix anything here because this is now the real path) /usr/include/X11 is what users should use instead of /usr/X11R6/include/X11 (dito) http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#USRX11R6XWINDOWSYSTEMVERSION11R... There is no instance of /usr/X11 in this document. Otherwise, all tools should continue to look at the old directories (they mostly already do so), but the purpose of the move was getting rid of /usr/X11R6 which is considered legacy stuff. It's known since quite a while that Xorg >= 7.0 doesn't use this hierarchy any more, SUSE actually gave you much more time for fixing scripts than other distributions who did 6.8 -> 7.0 (SUSE did 6.8 -> 6.9 -> 7.2, 6.9 is the same as 7.0 with X11R6 paths and a different build system). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.