Re: mplayer & qt?

["Julio M. Merino Vidal" <jmmv84%gmail.com@localhost>]

On 9/18/06, Martin S. Weber <Ephaeton%gmx.net@localhost> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 06:42:55PM +0200, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> > On 9/18/06, Rhialto <rhialto%falu.nl@localhost> wrote:
> > >On Sat 16 Sep 2006 at 22:51:13 +0200, Juan RP wrote:
> > >> cd multimedia/mplayer && make PKG_OPTIONS.mplayer=-arts
> > >
> > >I have that "-arts" in my global option (in /etc/mk.conf):
> > >
> > >PKG_DEFAULT_OPTIONS += -arts
> > >
> > >and I would argue that it should be turned off by default, since it is
> > >far too heavy-weight.
> >
> > But in that case you are providing a default binary package that will
> > not work nicely on a KDE desktop.
>
> Fine. We have non-kde users who are forced qt/kde down their throat. Imagine
> a gnome-centric user, how does she feel having forced kde down her throat?
> (or does she use that <censored> gnome sw instead?).

It will only pull in some KDE *libraries* that won't be visible to the
user at all.  Keep in mind that mplayer is compiled with *both* esound
and arts support.  So if the user is running GNOME (with the sound
daemon enabled) mplayer will default to esound.

On a similar rationale, I'd argue that mplayer ought not to be linked
against SDL.  After all the SDL output is generally not used (at least
in my case, so I tune my build to exclude it).  But there will
certainly be binary-only users that want SDL support and we should not
force them to rebuild anything in that case.

--
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84%gmail.com@localhost>
The Julipedia - http://julipedia.blogspot.com/