Re: gtk frontend status report

2003-02-06 Thread Michael Cardenas
I'm very sorry to respond so late. I've been busy trying to stop the war. I'll take a look at your udebs soon. I think we have all we need now. Please take a look at the posting I made on debian-boot yesterday titled a graphical frontend for debian-installer for some new requirements for these

Re: gtk frontend status report

2003-01-15 Thread Shiju p. Nair
Hi Michael, Am sorry for delay in replying. Yes, I have created atk udeb. You can found related files here : http://madhu.homelinux.org/debian/atk This single udeb contains the shared libraries and the common files which the runtime libraries need (this is two seperate package in debian

Re: gtk frontend status report

2003-01-01 Thread Junichi Uekawa
We still need to have an eye on the space that is occupied on the ramdisk. The udebs do not contain any unneeded modules or documentation and in some cases they use other compile options then their deb counterparts. They should not be deb/udeb counterparts that are binary-incompatible.

Re: gtk frontend status report

2003-01-01 Thread Sebastian Ley
Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This should be done with a new directfb package, with a completely different soname, and pkglibdir (or whereever directfb stores its plugins) Ok, let me see if I got that right: 1) We want the installer to be as versatile as possible. That means,

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-31 Thread Sebastian Ley
Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've finally managed to build, but not test, udebs for glib, pango, and gtk+-directfb. We are probably not going to have a floppy image from them (which will involve having PIC packages for each library package, which is a big burden) and if we are

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-31 Thread Martin Sjögren
tis 2002-12-31 klockan 12.22 skrev Sebastian Ley: But there is still need for the udebs. I am basically thinking of two scenarios: 1) Net Install: After finishing setting up your network, the libraries are pulled in by anna and the frontend can be changed. 2) CD Install: The Disk Image on

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-31 Thread Junichi Uekawa
We are probably not going to have a floppy image from them (which will involve having PIC packages for each library package, which is a big burden) and if we are not going to need to fit on a floppy, what is the point of making a udeb for ? No, there is no way that they will fit on the

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-31 Thread Martin Sjögren
tis 2002-12-31 klockan 15.13 skrev Junichi Uekawa: Since anna only handles udebs and the initial ramdisk is limited there is a need to package the prerequisite libraries into udebs. I would personally rather have anna only bootstrap enough so that apt works, than trying to have packages

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-31 Thread Michael Cardenas
On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 03:30:45PM +0100, Martin Sj?gren wrote: tis 2002-12-31 klockan 15.13 skrev Junichi Uekawa: Since anna only handles udebs and the initial ramdisk is limited there is a need to package the prerequisite libraries into udebs. I would personally rather have anna only

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-31 Thread Sebastian Ley
Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, there is no way that they will fit on the floppy image. I tried to make pic files for all of them and reduce them by mklibs simultanously but that did not work out. What does not work out in what way ? As long as there are pic files for

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-31 Thread Junichi Uekawa
We still need to have an eye on the space that is occupied on the ramdisk. The udebs do not contain any unneeded modules or documentation and in some cases they use other compile options then their deb counterparts. A good example is directfb: They should change their sonames, at least this

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-30 Thread Shiju p. Nair
+++ Michael Cardenas [29/12/02 03:05 -0800]: * I've finally managed to build, but not test, udebs for glib, pango, * and gtk+-directfb. * * After building 3 udebs, I finally have an idea of how it should be * done, I think. * * I've uploaded all of them to: * * people.debian.org/~mbc/udebs *

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-30 Thread Junichi Uekawa
I've finally managed to build, but not test, udebs for glib, pango, and gtk+-directfb. I'm having doubts on whether we really need udebs for them. I want some clarification on this point. We are probably not going to have a floppy image from them (which will involve having PIC packages for

gtk frontend status report

2002-12-29 Thread Michael Cardenas
I've finally managed to build, but not test, udebs for glib, pango, and gtk+-directfb. After building 3 udebs, I finally have an idea of how it should be done, I think. I've uploaded all of them to: people.debian.org/~mbc/udebs These still need a lot of work, and they need to be combined

Re: gtk frontend status report

2002-12-29 Thread Sebastian Ley
Michael Cardenas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our general plan at this point is that the user will begin the install in text mode and then have the option to select another frontend (the frontend chooser isn't even begun yet, I don't think). Once it is chosen, the necessary udebs will be