Re: graphics or text as default?
On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 05:06:03PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 May 2006 10:25, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > My point really was that it's silly to drop the graphical installer as
> > a target for Etch if you need to compile differently for gtk-dfb
> > anyway; so if the regular gtk2 packages aren't at the correct version,
> > having a different gtk2 source package which compiles the .udeb (and
> > nothing more--unless you need some -dev packages to be able to build
> > the installer image) would seem to be the obvious solution.
> Yes, we _do_ need a normal lib package and lib-dev package as we need
> those to compile the cdebconf-gtk frontend against.
> Having these packages conflict with the regular ones is not really an
> option IMO. It would probably work for buildds, but it would make working
> on the graphical installer on normal systems a pain.
Who said they need to conflict? In fact, there already is a package
'libgtk+2.0-directfb-dev' which you can install concurrently with
libgtk2.0-dev. There's no reason why another version (which would do
what you need it to do) couldn't be installed concurrently with the
other two variants.
Fun will now commence
-- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4