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? -- keith.packard@xxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Fontconfig mailing list Fontconfig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig
