On Thu, Nov 22, at 05:07 Randy McMurchy wrote: > Ag. D. Hatzimanikas wrote these words on 11/22/07 15:19 CST: > > > And without fun, I think the book needs some cleanups and this is > > a perfect candidate for removal. > > Why? There are still packages that use it as a dependency. Not sure > which one but I see I installed it in my last build, which means it > is a dependency of something.
Guess you are right; balsa and w3m depend on it. > > What is gained by removing it from the book? It's a maintenance-free > type package, right? As long you (at least you) are building it and confirm that works, then -yes- it's a maintenance-free package. I am not building it in every new build. I just compiled it once before months (months I believe), and I call the uncompface binary from a script, just to view xfaces in the rare case some uses an xface image in her/his client. It worked so far so I hadn't the need to rebuilt it, till now that I had to do it for the update. The package was un-maintanable for years in the book. The last release was in October of 2005 and nobody bothered to update it. I just don't think that is enough important package to have it in the book. That's all, nothing else. So please disregard. -- http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/wiki/Hacking -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
