On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 01:27:17PM -0500, BandiPat wrote: > On Sunday 11 December 2005 05:25, Manish Singh wrote: > [...] > > I put thought into it. As I pointed out in my other mail, it seems > > like you're the one who didn't think things through before sending > > out emails. > > > > A gimp-devel package *must* have a dependency that either directly or > > indirectly pulls in glib-devel. If it doesn't, the package's > > dependency specification is broken. > > > > SuSE has a history of being shoddy in this regard, other examples > > that have affected gimp are glib-devel not requiring pkg-config, > > aalib being linked against slang but not requiring slang-devel, and a > > few more I can't recall off the top of my head right now. > > > > Please next time actually read and comprehend what's going on in the > > thread instead of sending out poorly researched knee-jerk defenses of > > your pet Linux distro. > > > > -Yosh > > _______________________________________________ > > Yosh, > I'm convinced you like whatever distro you're using as I do mine, but > I'm also very sure you haven't done much research into what you are > commenting about.
>From the rpmfind.net page for the gimp-devel package for SuSE 9.2 http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/suse/9.2/i386/suse/i586/gimp-devel-2.0.4-3.1.i586.html: Requires * rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 * rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 * rpmlib(PayloadIsBzip2) = 3.0.5-1 That's it. No glib2-devel or gtk2-devel listed at all. This seems fixed in SuSE 10, but not completely, as they still miss depending on GIMP itself. BandiPat, I expect a full and public apology from you for your personal attacks and your own lack of research. -Yosh _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
