Re: bug status for 2.4 release

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 12:59 -0400, James Cloos wrote:
> >>>>> "Keith" == Keith Packard <keithp@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >> local.conf should probably also be done that way, then, too.
> Keith> Yes, you're right, although 'local.conf' is fairly deprecated these days
> Keith> with conf.d available.
> Good point.  Perhaps a good time, then, to complete the deprecation?

Ah, perhaps. Although, it's reasonably harmless to continue to include
it, perhaps from a file in conf.d

> Good question.  I see that there is no general consensus among the
> distributions for, as an example, apache setups.  Some use .avail
> and .enabled; some use just .d.  But I rather prefer .avail/.enabled.

I think we're fairly well stuck with 'conf.d' for now, but we can
install our supported configuration files in conf.avail.

Can you get this working for the 2.4 release?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Fontconfig mailing list

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Fonts]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Kernel]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Gimp Graphics Editor]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux