Hi,
> > EEEEW! So now we're going to have config files littered all
> > across %{_libdir}? That's absolutely horrid. And I suppose upstream doesn't
> > care and will not change this at all to be, you know, SANE?
>
> AFAICT, they're not _really_ config files.
They are and they aren't. In mono terms, they are, in the sane world we
live in, they're not. However, we're in the mono world here...
> A config file is something
> that a person might be expected to change. Instead, these are more like
> data files which tell mono how to do it's native dll importing by
> mapping a generic name (say libc) to an actual shared library name that
> exists on the system (libc.so.6)
So they're more like mapping files. Looking at the contents of say
php.conf in /etc/httpd/conf.d it can be argued that the files are human
changable, but how many people are going to change them? Okay, it's 6 or
1 here, but I'd still contend that conf.d is a saner place than
splattered around the gac.
> Also, it's hardly littered across the filesystem -- they end up
> under /usr/lib/mono/gac/<package>/<version> which seems sane as well
It does. Question goes like this. I have a package waiting to go into
extras (sdldotnet) which requires that the %{_sysconfdir}/mono/config
file is altered. The reason is that the dlls in the gac directories are
fine as they stand, but need mapping onto "real" SDL files (as the
package is really a wrapper for SDL and OpenGL).
There are quite a few mono apps like this that I'm looking to get into
Extras over the next couple of months.
> Think of it more like the pkgconfig "config" files (which are just data)
> as opposed to config files in the httpd.conf sense
You can't as they're not. Well, not really...
TTFN
Paul
--
"Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" -
Dr Who
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list