Re: Flattened GNUstep structure? No!

[Helge Hess]

"Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote:
> Not a  point against  deep directory structure,  but on  the contrary,
> showing that it should be deepened,  or at least, we should add sub os
> tags     such    as     gnu-linux-redhat-6.1,    gnu-linux-redhat-7.0,
> gnu-linux-mandrake-7.0, gnu-linux-debian-potatoe...

Hm, I think this is wrong. Actually most (compile time) stuff will be
portable between the different Linux versions. Eg we build all our SuSE
and Redhat pkg on a SuSE 6.2, which works perfect.

We had most problems with changing glibc's (eg when going SuSE 6.1->SuSE
6.2), maybe the libc could be reflected.

> (*) Even  if the  range has reduced,  I understand  that MS-Windows-NT
>  also runs  on a range of  different architectures. Who are  we to say
>  that  no  MS-Windows-NT  administrator  may  install  a  shared  deep
>  directory  structure for his  GNUstep system  and applications  to be
>  used on both MS-Windows-NT-i586 and MS-Windows-NT-alpha, or whatever.

You have indeed different archs on NT, even without the cpu ! Eg
ix86-mingw32 and ix86-cygwin32 and ix86-uwin and ...

Helge
-- 
SKYRIX Software AG - http://www.skyrix.com