Martin Costabel wrote:
Hiding headers and libraries (and soon probably also binaries like *-config stuff) in nonstandard places can be justified in very exceptional cases (like for freetype2 or guile16), but for something as standard as a compiler it is absurd.
There are always going to be special cases, but I was under the assumption this wasn't about things like g77, but more about things like, uhh, forget the name, but that C interpreter, which would need to actually read headers at runtime as data.
In most cases, we'd be just formalizing what is already a "best practice", i.e. splitting off a -dev just like we currently unofficially do -- things with headers that have, say, only static libraries, or are just an interface like ladspa, where there's a header, but no library at all.
-- Benjamin Reed, a.k.a. RangerRick [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://ranger.befunk.com/
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by The 2004 JavaOne(SM) Conference Learn from the experts at JavaOne(SM), Sun's Worldwide Java Developer Conference, June 28 - July 1 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, CA REGISTER AND SAVE! http://java.sun.com/javaone/sf Priority Code NWMGYKND _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
