Subject: Re: xscreensaver --without-pam ?
To: Frederick Bruckman <email@example.com>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/22/2003 18:04:16
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> The problem with that, is that it's then a hidden dependency. In other
> words, if it happens to be detected on the build system, the binary
> packages won't even run on systems that don't have and don't need PAM.
Maybe make it so nothing under /usr/include or /usr/lib is seen by forcing
gcc to ignore them. Then have buildlink2.mk files listing BUILDLINK_FILES
for the files we need. (jlam told me he had ideas for this.)
Jeremy C. Reed