On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 19:38:58 +0200
Joost van der Sluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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.
Fedora didn't change the links since FC3. (Or maybe even FC2?)
For example:
The glib-1.2.10 package installs
/usr/lib/libglib-1.2.so.0 -> libglib-1.2.so.0.0.10
The only missing thing is the link to /usr/lib/libglib-1.2.so.0. That's what
the new lazarus rpm create. And it creates them only if they do not exist
already.
Don't forget: we are talking about gtk1.2, which is not developed anymore.
For gtk2 the above would be an evil hack.
> 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...
The lazarus rpm only depends on gtk1 packages.
The gtk2 lcl is only compiled ppu. The rpm does not contain any gtk2
executable.
> Any ideas about this?
I agree, that a separate gtk2-lcl package would be better (containing the
.ppu and the dependencies to gtk2). This package would need at least one rpm
for redhat and one for suse.
Mattias
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
