vmware3 on FreeBSD 4.11 and 5.4

[Rodney W. Grimes]

...
> Personally I don't care if we install everything in LOCALBASE or not
> (even if I see some benefits in having separate trees for X11 using ports
> and non-X11 using ports, e.g. when sharing a common base on desktops
> and servers), but I don't want to touch the status quo.
> 
> Is it non-trivial to move the vmware config files, or does vmware store
> some paths to his binaries in the config?

My bike shed is Blue....

I just read what the bsd.port.mk files say about LINUXBASE LOCALBASE
and X11BASE and dont much agree that ``LOCALBASE is non-X11 ports
install things''.

IMHO thats just the wrong way to define that.

1)  /usr/X11R6 was created for the sole purpose of holding the XFree86
    or other X11R6 based release, it was more or less a private place
    for the X people to control.

2)  using non- to qualifiy anything is a bad way to describe it as it
    is far to open ended.

3)  Technically I could argue that linux stuff is non-X11 and belongs
    in this tree and that the LINUXBASE is in conflict with the stated
    purpose of LOCALBASE.  (Someone just dumped a can of yellow paint
    on my blue bikeshead!!! Grrrrrrrrr).

4)  In doing some research of some problem I was having.. think it has
    to do with linux_base-rh-7.3 I ran into some converstations in the
    linux camp that seems to say that /usr/X11R6 is going away, that they
    are gona fold that into the standard install locations.  Weither this
    is / or /usr/local I do not know.

5)  Cluttering ``applications that use X'' into the X tree makes it a BITCH
    to replace X (ie, switch back and forth from X.org and XFree86).


Care to paint your bikesheed now....


-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 freebsd at freebsd.org