Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Orvar Korvar wrote:
>
>   
>> Ah, shit. I wrote wrong. I didnt meant SUNlcms. I meant 
>> SUNWlcms-devel. I have trouble finding it to download.
>>     
>
> I notice that the OpenSolaris SFE collection is missing a spec file 
> for lcms. I recall that lcms has been undergoing the ARC process to 
> become a formal part of Solaris so perhaps that is why.
>
>   
>> Hey guys, it was my fault, I apologize for that. Lets be happy and 
>> nice to each other. Together we make Solaris even better, and you 
>> all dedicate much time and learn other people on this forum. Lets 
>> keep it that way. Anyway, Bob F and you all, thanx for your efforts! 
>> Keep up the good work! :o)
>>     
>
> There was indeed a time when lcms was often a nightmare to build 
> correctly.  So I spent 3 or 4 days of my life to correct that and 
> nowadays lcms is usually trivial to build.  I am not the author of 
> lcms, but each of us does his part to make the world of open source a 
> better place for us all.
>
> Bob
> ======================================
> Bob Friesenhahn
> bfriesen at simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
> GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-discuss mailing list
> desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org
>   
Bob.  Again, if you didn't get this before, my comment was regarding 
Wine itself, not the dependencies.  I do not usually blame the authors 
who are responsible for involved libraries, except in this instance the 
focal point of this locked and loaded weapon, being Wine in general, 
including libwine.  It's not an issue with lcms, I knew you weren't the 
author, the problem is with trying to build Wine, has been for ages, but 
just shortly before people like you got involved we couldn't even get 
past the dependencies.

We're in a minefield...

James

Reply via email to