On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Simon Burge wrote:

# Greywolf wrote:
# 
# > On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Soren S. Jorvang wrote:
# > 
# > # On Sat, Oct 09, 1999 at 11:41:22PM -0700, Tim Rightnour wrote:
# > # > On 09-Oct-99 Miles Nordin wrote:
# > # > >  and X includes in
# > # > > /usr/include/X11. 
# > # > 
# > 
# > Typically /usr/include/X11 is a symlink to /usr/X11(R6)/include/X11.
# 
# "Typically"?

Yes -- since X11R2 this has been the case (I've been using it).

It's also typical that /usr/lib/X11 is a symlink to
/usr/X11{,R[23456]}/lib/X11, ->at least in my experience<-.

# 
# > The only place I have ever seen /usr/bin/X11 has been under HP-UX,
# > and IMNSHO, they broke paradigm with that.
# 
# DEC started with /usr/{bin,include,lib}/X11 and X11 libraries in
# /usr/lib on Ultrix and seem to have kept it that way with OSF/1^W DU^W
# Tru64.

Having a directory in /usr/bin just seems wrong to me.  Of course, we
were doing some development on/with X, so including the /usr/X11
hierarchy in our $PATH and in the -I, -L and -R flags was not out of
the question (we weren't using gcc, so -Wl,-R made no sense at the
time).

#  _Not_ having to specify fancy -I, -L and -Wl,-R flags makes a
# lot of sense to me to use the vendor supplied windowing system.

"That's what the symlinks were for."

# I'd be quite happy to use such a scheme...
# 
# Simon.

				--*greywolf;
--
NetBSD. Not Guano.