On 12/10/05, BandiPat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 10 December 2005 20:12, michael chang wrote:
> > Trying to answer Pat's cry for a summary...
> > --
> > ~Mike
> > - Just the crazy copy cat.
> Thanks Mike for the reprint. Also, no need to send out two mails. I'm
> on this list, so read the list mail. One mail to the list will
I realized, the original would have been in the archives too somewhere, eh?
> Sounds like the OP is confused at what they need to get things compiled.
> I'm sure all the chatter about how to solve it and the debate on
> distros has cleared things up considerably too. (not) ;o)
I guess the problem is that very few people have had success with SuSE
on this list in regards to gimp-perl (or aren't speaking up). As
such, those talking are recommending what they know works. *shrugs*
> I'm guessing if SuSE thought it was needed, it would be installed as a
> dependency or be available to install for compiling. They are pretty
> efficient like that.
Efficiency can be troublesome. Whether a dependancy is neccessary is
different from whether a dependency is useful -- often a package
doesn't _need_ something per se, but either A) having it adds
functionality that is often used, or B) having it is nice if you've
got room. (I forget how RPM depends work, but I know Debian Packages
have 3 levels of dependencies... that makes everything more complex
because programs and users have to know which levels of depends to
automatically fill and which levels not to filil, but the user can
usually manually specify what s/he wants in the program...)
I think the critism is that users are following their intuition and
SuSE is not the exact same as what they expect. (I fall guilty to
> To Manish Singh:
> SuSE and YaST2 work as well or better than any other file install
> utility at solving dependencies. Thing you fail to realize is that
As above, there are multiple levels of dependencies... some think more
> -devel files are not dependencies. The main files don't need the
No they aren't, and Debian, Fedora (I hope) and the like also
recognize that. The issue is that -devel files may need other -devel
files to work. For example, there is no point in having a patch for
xyz for the linux kernel and trying to use it without having the linux
kernel source, or at least the headers. [Whether I get the last two
via kernel.org or a package from my distro is another issue - the key
is that the thing gets found by whatever needs it...]
> -devel files to operate, nor does the system. They are only needed if
> the user intends to compile things. The best thing to do when
> installing any Linux is to just include -devel files or add them at
> install time.
The essential question is if it is _NECESSARY_ to compile gimp-perl
for the user's system. No one using SuSE has answered this.
Do you currently have a SuSE 9.2 Pro system accesssable to you? It
would be nice if you could get gimp-perl 2.0 working with GIMP on it
(preferably via binary packages, although any method is fine) and
inform the original poster (CCed in this post -- BTW, Myke, are you on
the list?) of how it is done. It would even be informative to just
tell us that this is only available in SuSE 10 or newer or similar.
Again, if it is not possible to get it running, I hope downgrading to
GIMP 1.2 is an option.
My only other thought is - could SuSE have gone and bundled gimp-perl
with the system and then removed the scripts for "Add Glow" and
"Center Layer"? If so, then those two script would have to be
manually retrieved and placed in the correct location by the user...
(I would hope this is just me being paranoid and very UNTRUE.)
- Just the crazy copy cat.
Gimp-user mailing list