Re: Debian and SimplyGNUstep

[Matthias Klose]

Jeff Teunissen writes:
> Matthias Klose wrote:
> > The thing he doesn't like are the unusual/unfriendly places (called
> > the Unix File System Hierarchy (FHS)). Some time before the KDE people
> > didn't like, now someone from the GNUstep community doesn't like
> > it. If you know of a better schema which fits the FHS, please let us
> > know.
> 
> The "ideal" GNUstep layout is rampantly, even enthusiastically,
> non-compliant with the FHS (and thus Policy) -- and frankly, there is
> nothing that can be done about it so there's no use talking about it.
> It's merely a layout which is highly preferred over both a FHS-compliant
> one AND the default GNUstep layout.
> 
> That is to say that what is on Debian /usr/lib/GNUstep/System, is (in
> this layout) /System. Same for Network and Local.

so if you need, why not make a symlink yourself? Better, make the
GNUstep window manager do this automatically. The user you want to
target will merely notice it.

> In addition, it would place a file in the root directory, .hidden, which
> is something like a .cvsignore file containing things which are to be
> (optionally, keyed on the value of the user's "UNIX Expert" preference)
> hidden by GUI classes which display the filesystem. For example, this
> file might contain (on an otherwise clean Debian system):

again, that's a thing for the window manager / file browser, I do see
these directories in Darwin as well.

> On this issue, even with my own Debian hat on, I just punt and say "you
> can't do it in Debian, so it has to be done separately".

IIRC, the KDE people did say this as well (before 2.2 entered Debian
FHS compliant).

> To an extent
> that I'm not going to be doing any GNUstep stuff for Debian myself,
> because I wouldn't be actually using my own packages. Even those for
> which I'm the upstream (like Preferences, recently uploaded by you).

I fail to see that this can be done inside the FHS. The issues you
describe can be hidden by a view (file browser) on the things.

Chad Hardin writes:
> Because the install locations are not ideal for a user-centered GNUstep 
> based desktop system.
> That's the main reason.
> GNUstep really doesn't fit into the FHS mode.  With KDE and GNOME you 
> can "hide" the actual program file locations with their (yucky) "Start" 
> menu type system.  GNUstep has no concept, you launch programs by 
> double-clicking the actual Application itself, not via some "Start" 
> menu abstraction.

well, what's the difference between clicking an icon on the desktop or
on the dock? why does have wmaker to care about the Applications
folder in / or somewhere else?

> You can't expect the typical user to launch Applications by going to 
> /usr/lib/GNUstep/System/Applications, that just won't happen.  Plus, 
> even expereince users probably wouldn't want to do that.
> 
> Much easier to simply go to /Applications or /System/Applications and 
> launch your app.

well, I never go there. either I double click on the desktop (and I
don't care about the locations), or I use openapp from the command
line (not caring about the location).

What Debian currently misses, is from my point of view:

- a setup for display managers (xdm, gdm, kdm), so a user can choose
  at the login prompt a GNUstep session and X starts up with a GNUstep
  desktop (before properly sourcing GNUstep.sh, starting GNUstep user
  daemons, etc ...)

- a GNUstep meta packages containing dependencies to packages which
  make up a basic GNUstep desktop.

These two would make for a much better user expericence, any
volunteers?

> > - assume he makes his packages for one architecture, he's missing
> >   six other archs.
> 
> Shouldn't the .dsc sources I'm creating be able to be made into binary 
> packages of any architecture?  I'm brand new to Debian package making, 
> but this seems to be the case.

If you take care, yes. But who builds these?

> > The thing he doesn't like are the unusual/unfriendly places (called
> > the Unix File System Hierarchy (FHS)). Some time before the KDE people
> > didn't like, now someone from the GNUstep community doesn't like
> > it. If you know of a better schema which fits the FHS, please let us
> > know.
> 
> FHS is great for the typical UNIX system, and I don't want to change it 
> all, with the exception of the GNUstep stuff.

I still think, this can be done by some clever UI abstraction,
provided you target a "user".

Chad Hardin writes:
> Yep, I'm not saying I want to inject non-FHS compliant packages for 
> GNUstep into Debian.  I'm just saying that I'm gonna be making a lot of 
> GNUstep related packages which install in non-FHS locations, in my own 
> repository.  and, while I'm at it, I may as well contribute the work I 
> do to the Debian packages, which install the Debian way.

If you do this, please submit changes to the Debian bug tracking
system for changes in the Debian subdir, however I think you should
try to reach your goals on the basis of a Debian setup.

        Matthias