You do understand what Stephan said.
It is not what I've said, it is what Stephan said...
I agree with you.
I do not use network either...
However, my discuss is more about the fact that people do care about the way
how they may use it without dependencies...
Less dependencies means less installs and less issue because some dependencies
are not found or are hard to find...
Best Regards
K.
________________________________
De : "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
À : [email protected]
Envoyé le : Vendredi 1 février 2013 0h49
Objet : Re: [fossil-users] I suggest a lite release of fossil so --static could
be used
>
>Why don't fossil create a lite version that could be static and the full one
>which
>will forbid the static option ?
>Isn't that a good idea ?
>That's like asking, "why not have a fossil which has no networking support?"
>and the
>answer is, "because it would be nearly useless." On modern Linuxes the
>networking
>libraries require dynamically libraries at runtime (they will link but will
>emit
>a warning while linking and may or may not work at runtime).
>
I'm not sure if I understand what's being said, but if I do, I would disagree
that Fossil sans networking support would be "nearly useless".
I use Fossil locally exclusively. I may be in the minority. I do not know.
^K
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
