Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: March 2000:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [FreeCiv-Cvs] vasc: Added gtk+ resource file for the c
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [FreeCiv-Cvs] vasc: Added gtk+ resource file for the c

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [FreeCiv-Cvs] vasc: Added gtk+ resource file for the client.
From: David Pfitzner <dwp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 12:55:32 +1100 (EST)

> This is an automated notification of a change to freeciv cvs, 
> on Sat Mar  4 12:07:13 PST 2000 = Sat Mar  4 20:07:13 2000 (GMT)
> by Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa <vasc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> ---- Files affected:
> 
> freeciv/data freeciv.rc
> 
> ---- Log message:
> 
> Added gtk+ resource file for the client.

Good, but I'm wondering if we should rationalize the locations
of the config files somewhat.  We currently have:

~/.civclientrc    common options for all clients
~/Freeciv         Xaw resources file
~/freeciv.rc      Gtk+ resources file
~/.freeciv/       In default FREECIV_PATH, eg for rulesets, tilesets.

Or maybe this is ok, if the toolkit-specific files follow the
conventions for those toolkits?  (Eg, I'm not sure we can even 
change ~/Freeciv for Xaw resources?)  But I would prefer 
clientrc be moved into ~/.freeciv/ (and ideally we would also
have a server rc file, planned for some time but not implemented 
yet).

Another issue: we currently keep an autogenerated copy of
client/gui-xaw/Freeciv.h in CVS; do we also want the new
client/gui-gtk/Freeciv.h in CVS?  Recall we keep autogenerated
files in CVS for the benefit of people who may not have all the
tools.  In this case the only relevant tool seems to be 'sed',
which configure etc rely on anyway, so maybe we need neither
in CVS?

-- David






[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]