[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Dependency hell, again (was Re: dasher)
On Jan 7, 2010, at 10:41 PM, Magnus Eriksson wrote:
> I sent an email to Patrick off-list saying pretty much the exact same thing
> that Geert said in his reply, and even with the same subject line. Thought it
> would be off topic, but I guess not.
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Julio Merino wrote:
>>>> The dasher README suggests that the Gnome depencies are optional
>>>> I tried ./configure --without-gnome but it still insisted on
>> And, please, please, if you want to make gnome dependencies optional,
>> create a new package, say dasher-gtk, which builds dasher without
>> gnome support. Don't add a build option to dasher to disable these
> I've tried to parse that paragraph a dozen times now, and I can't seem to
> make sense of it unless I assume that either the writer or the reader is a
> complete idiot. Neither seems that likely, so could you clarify?
As was explained to me, a while back, options in packages are bad, because you
can't have binary packages for all possible settings. A variant of the package
-- perhaps with a Makefile.common -- with something like that set differently,
solves that problem; there can be binaries of each variant.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
Main Index |
Thread Index |