Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 01:38:41 +0200 From: Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de> To: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/15545: New port: x11/xterm Message-ID: <20000401013841.B581@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de> In-Reply-To: <20000330075635.I312@supernews.com>; from ade@FreeBSD.org on Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 07:56:35AM -0600 References: <200003300200.SAA03085@freefall.freebsd.org> <200003300920.BAA47089@freefall.freebsd.org> <20000330075635.I312@supernews.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ade Lovett: > > Why not have the port rename the executable and app-default file to > > something else? (nxterm? xterm-the-next-generation :)?) and allow both > > flavours to coexist? > > Precisely. If it does this, then all my objections go away If this was your point all along, you could have said so directly. :-/ > If the submitter (or someone else) wants to take this port and > patch it so that it identifies itself as nxterm, pxterm, or > whatever, Suggestions? nxterm has been abused by Red Hat for different flavors of xterm. Thomas Dickey suggests xfree86-xterm, which is however both clumsy and counter-intuitive. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000401013841.B581>