On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Thomas Adam wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:01:50AM +0200, Greg BOGNAR wrote: > > I don't think there is much of a difference between fvwm and > > fvwm-gnome, and it's a bit unclear to me what the latter is supposed > > to do differently. Fvwm-gnome depends on a bunch of stupid gnome > > libraries, which is a good reason not to use it (just what is supposed > > to be the advantage of them?). > > That's the package maintainer seeing 'FvwmGTK' and panicking. For some > reason, he doesn't think reading the documentation is a prerequisite to > packaging FVWM. Before he split the packages into fvwm and fvwm-gnome, > fvwm would depend on all of that GNOME stuff.
But then it's a good thing he did, isn't it, since now you can have fvwm without those libraries... So I'm not sure why I'd need to compile it myself (using the pre-packaged debs are just more convenient). Greg
