x11-themes/linux-hicolor-icon-theme fails to install if sysutils/linux-nero

[Alexander Leidinger]

Quoting "John Hein" <jhein at timing.com> (from Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:36:37 -0600):

>  > While I'm not sure this is the right fix, making sysutils/linux-nero's
>  > RUN_DEPEND on x11-themes/linux-hicolor-icon-theme will fix this.
>
> Won't that cause the linux-nero port to install it's icon files into
> /usr/local/share/icons (through the sym link), but leave the plist
> relative to LINUXBASE?
>
> The problem is that linux-hicolor-icon-theme assumes it owns
> everything under share/icons/hicolor.

I would expect this behavior. The question is if this is bad or not. I  
don't doubt that it is not clean from the style point of view, but I  
would expect that the files are correctly removed on deinstall of nero.

> Has anyone ever considered using unionfs for /compat/linux/usr/share?
>
> One problem I can see is that 'share' is not the only directory
> that should be shared.  etc?

It is not shared via the symlink directly, it's shared by the nature  
of the linuxulator to fall through to the FreeBSD path if the  
/compat/linux/ one is not there. So there's already some sort of  
unionfs there, just not with the complete unionfs semantics.

> I'm not sure unionfs is up to the job, but I'm wondering if any has
> considered it or even tried it.

I haven't. I'm not aware of anyone who has.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether
she will or will not be a mother.
		-- Margaret H. Sanger

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137