On Friday, 24. August 2001 00:16, Thayne Harbaugh wrote:
> There's another way to look at things:
> ...
> Now, tell me where I'm wrong.
I think you're right and ggi is wrong in that it does sth. good being
highly dynamic and to instantly rewrite this to also be static is bad.
I believe your statement really makes a point. GGI will make it's way.
Concerning debian, you might have read my mail in the meantime.
I still believe this is FUD from a Puszta-BSDy (don't get me wrong,
i've got friends over there, i mean Hungaria, not BSD ;-)
I try to find a way with debian anyway. After thinking a few minutes
after the last post: can you imagine a statically linked input-null of
500k? The libggi package might come directly behind xfree in size.
In case it would not be possible to find a solution without, would i
try to get static interface libs working. Might need some help of yours.
Really useful statics (in the sense of Thaynes and Brians ideas) are a
long way ahead as far as i understand that pieces of code that i've
come by yet.
So, may the FUN be with us, greetings, martin
