Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:23:46 -0400 From: W Gerald Hicks <wghicks@bellsouth.net> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@rush.net> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>, John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, wghicks@wghicks.bellsouth.net Subject: Re: Adding desktop support (please don't) Message-ID: <199904281823.OAA93307@bellsouth.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:22:50 CDT." <Pine.BSF.3.96.990428131758.10204W-100000@cygnus.rush.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Also note that all userland programs (with the exception of dosemu) > are command line driven. Running them by clicking on them in X will > most likely do nothing. This doesn't belong in the base system, > instead it's a standard should be proposed to the GNOME, KDE and other > windowing systems people. A resource fork can be useful to help application developers targeting multiple OS's. Each OS seems to have its own special rules about where supplemental static data should be stored. Often a vendor will shrug the burden and offer support for only one or two OS's. Having a resource fork within executable images might help make multiple target support more manageable for ISV types. It would not be an error to have a null resource fork... The concept isn't necessarily limited to GUI applications and has been successfully used by OS/2, Macs and Windows among others. I'm not aware of anything similar for any Unix but ELF seems to open the door for interesting possibilities there too. Cheers, Jerry Hicks wghicks@bellsouth.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904281823.OAA93307>