Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on November 07, 2005 08:53 PM
Many, many programs refuse to compile or run with that odd hierarchy. So Gobo patches the programs.
Not true: the idea is not to patch but to pass appropriate options to configure and/or make, and to link anything of the "odd hierarchy" against a legacy hierarchy to make sure that harcoded path don't get application to complain.
To quote Hisham H. Muhammad (a main developer of gobolinux): "We persuade them to cope with the GoboLinux tree with compilation options whenever possible. However, there are many programs that can't cope completely, featuring hardcoded paths in their sources and whatnot. Ultimately any free software can be patched to cope, but I'm not sure if we have enough manpower for such a task and maintain it afterwards. It would be, at the very least, a big hassle, and I generally like to reduce the applied patches to the minimum (btw, the patches I normally apply are those related to compilation with GCC3 and security patches in the base packages, usually from Linux From Scratch)."
"Experience has shown that very few applications need to have their Makefiles dissected in order to cooperate."
"we strive for each project to keep its own identity. Whenever possible, we ship every application with unmodified sources."
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Nothing like Mac OS X filesystem
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 07, 2005 08:53 PMNot true: the idea is not to patch but to pass appropriate options to configure and/or make, and to link anything of the "odd hierarchy" against a legacy hierarchy to make sure that harcoded path don't get application to complain.
To quote Hisham H. Muhammad (a main developer of gobolinux):
"We persuade them to cope with the GoboLinux tree with compilation options whenever possible. However, there are many programs that can't cope completely, featuring hardcoded paths in their sources and whatnot. Ultimately any free software can be patched to cope, but I'm not sure if we have enough manpower for such a task and maintain it afterwards. It would be, at the very least, a big hassle, and I generally like to reduce the applied patches to the minimum (btw, the patches I normally apply are those related to compilation with GCC3 and security patches in the base packages, usually from Linux From Scratch)."
"Experience has shown that very few applications need to have their Makefiles dissected in order to cooperate."
"we strive for each project to keep its own identity. Whenever possible, we ship every application with unmodified sources."
#