On 29/04/2008, Jean-François Mertens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 28 Apr 2008, at 19:12, Tomoaki Okayama wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > gnuplot-nox and imagemagick-nox seem to depend on x11 wrongly.
> > I attach patches for them in 10.4/unstable. Here are the changes:
> >
> > nox_gnuplot.diff
> > * app-defaults, plotutils-shlibs and plotutils depend on x11.
> > Deleted.
> > * remove --with-plot=%p from ConfigureParams.
> >
> > nox_imagemagick.diff
> > * openexr depends on x11-shlibs. Deleted.
> > * Correct a typo in ConfigureParams.
> >
> >
> > In addition, some of packages in Depends or BuildDepends need x11
> > *for make*. For example, x11-dev is needed to build libjasper.1-shlibs
> > and libdjvulibre15-shlibs, which imagemagick-nox depends on.
> > If binary packages of them are not available, nox-users cannot
> > install imagemagick-nox.
> >
> > Is that ok? Is there any policy in Fink?
>
>
> I may be partly an indirectly responsible for some of those _ or
> intending
> to be so at some time for some others (e.g., a 'fully enabled"
> 'gnuplot-max'
> variant here).
>
> Let me try to answer your question, "is there any policy in fink" ...
> as how
> I've reacted to this question till now.. Let me first isolate the
> next paragraph:
>
> As I view it, there is no policy that links the name of a package to
> anything
> substantive.
>
> So, \emph{to the extent that I'm thinking x11 is becoming more and more
> available to and used by fink users}, I would think it may be in some
> cases reasonable to split a pkg between a "maximally enabled" and a
> "minimally enabled" variant in a different way than along strict x11
> or not
> dependency.
> E.g., for both of the pkgs you mention, there are are substantial
> additional
> capabilities possible requiring very little as as additonal deps or
> bdeps
> beyond X11 (and this is available even from Apple..), while the big jump
> in deps and bdeps would be those capabilities that involve a major part
> of gnome ...
>
I would disagree on this. If somebody wants the 'convert' utility or
libmagick there should be no need to install X11 which is currently
not minor. Even though X11 is available from Apple, their packages
aren't uninstallable. Fink X11 packages are but the X in fink is not
modular so the whole thing has to be built to get the library
ImageMagick wants.
I personally do use X so I would not mind but I see this as a major
annoyance for users not interested in X.
Thanks
Michal
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
