On 10 Mar 2009 01:47:47 +0100, Jesús Guerrero wrote:
> 
> In the gentoo ebuild, Gtk.pm and *FvwmGtkDebug* are removed
> unconditionally since I cleaned up the whole think (for 2.5.25
> I think, it's been long since), and no one has even complained
> about it. This is true for both the official ebuild for 2.5.26
> and the unofficial cvs one.

FvwmGtkDebug is not for the users, so this is not surprising. Still
it is interesting to ask what did you gain by removing 2 text files.
Especially the ones that were designed to work even without needed
dependencies by instructing users what should be done to make it
functional. Just dropping ebuild dependencies would be enough.

> Note that this stuff would anyway need gtk-perl,
> which was gone off the portage tree long ago, so, the official
> portage can't support that feature unless we add another
> gtk1-based package that's already deprecated and probably
> unmaintained.

This is all free software and users may build it easily if they want.
Even if not maintained anymore in specific distributions. BTW, fvwm
itself (and its dependencies, like libstroke) was also unmaintained
for a long time in some distributions, this never bothered us.

> The rest of gtk1 support should work (never used it myself
> though) and is controlled via an USE flag, but I don't know
> about anyone using it either. So, I don't think that Gentoo
> users in general would care about you dropping gtk1 at all.

Well, this is not new. Packagers of fvwm (with all honest respect to
them) always forced certain things on the users not intended by the
fvwm developers. :)

One [real] distribution may decide that fvwm package should depend on
pyxdg, ImageMagick, libxml2 and other never intended things. But also
decide to exclude two text files that should not have dependencies.

This is why we maintain the rpm and deb build procedures and encourage
users to build their own packages, not to be dependent on any external
decision and to get an installation similar to "make install". I don't
know whether the gentoo ebuild procedure should be included too.
It may be if for example the native package is made explicitely
incompatible with projects like fvwm-themes or wm-icons. :)

This is not to say I want to stay with GTK1. Not at all. Eventually
someone may port it to GTK2, there were some initiatives in the past.

Regards,
Mikhael.

Reply via email to