Official method for determining modular X module path?

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le samedi 03 décembre 2005 à 01:42 -0500, Mike A. Harris a écrit :

> We have a generic mechanism in our OS now called "alternatives",
> which was a concept borrowed from Debian I think, however it has
> not been used by many packages since we added it I don't think.
> 
> It is possible that we could develop some kind of standard wherein,
> OpenGL implementations are expected to install into a namespaced
> location in the system somewhere, and use the 'alternatives'
> mechanism in order for a particular OpenGL to be selected. That
> could be managed both from the commandline, and from the OS
> installer, or config tools easily I believe.

Believe me you don't want to use alternative. Not in your worst
nightmares.

Alternatives is very good when you need to coax applications that
hardcode paths to switch between implementations. For everything else it
sucks big time. (When all's said alternatives is just semi-automated
symlink spaghetti)

Better define naming/location rules so every implementations can coexist
in parallel, and a configuration files which define the one to use.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20051203/9a66a0f2/attachment.pgp>