On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 18:04 +0200, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 11:56 +0200, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> > > On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 01:47:10 +0200
> > > Joost van der Sluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, 2006-06-04 at 20:32 +0200, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> > > > > I created a new lazarus RPM, which does not depend on the gtk1 devel
> > > > > packages and therefore also works on SuSE, Fedora Core and probably
> > > > > even
> > > > > more.
> > > >
> > > > Where can I find the .src.rpm? Or the .spec-file?
> > >
> > > I will upload the src rpm.
> > >
> > >
> > > > And did you just left the dependency out, or is it really not dependent
> > > > on those packages?
> > >
> > > It does not depend on them.
> >
> > Wow, it even seems to work. Are those links the only parts of the -dev
> > packages which are actually used by Lazarus/LD?
> >
> > Nevertheless it's an ugly hack, I can't use this in the official fedora-
> > rpm's. (You're aware of the fact that you're creating a DLL-Hell for
> > linux this way?)
>
> We don't. They did, by not making the link themselves.
> We have to patch up their work.
I aggree with you on the SuSe-part. It's simply a SuSe-bug. It's not for
nothing that those -dev packages do exist on the commercial version.
But you can not use this on Fedora-core systems. If Fedora updates the
library, there is a change that Lazarus won't work anymore.
You can't get around providing different rpm's for different
distributions. Large problem is offcourse building them...
> In my opinion, when you install a library, you install everything:
> 1 Library
> 2 All needed symlinks
> 3 Header files needed to access the library.
>
> Most distro's split this into (1) and (2 and 3). This is OK if they
> supply (2 and 3) always. But SuSE does not. So they created the problem.
> We must hack a solution in.
> It's not RAD. A RAD like Lazarus should install on a vanilla system and
> simply WORK. All this splitting up is nonsense: the header files and
> symlinks take up very little space when compared to the libraries
> themselves...
Here I aggree with you, but in the 'c-world' people thing different
about this.
So now I have a different question:
I'm thinking about splitting the lazarus-package up in two parts: the
LCL and the rest. That way I can provide a separate gtk2-lcl package.
What do you think about this? Now the gtk1- and gtk2-compiled binaries
are there. But that way the lazarus package depens on both, gtk1 and
gtk2...
Any ideas about this?
Joost.
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
