[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: xlib6g now depends on xfree86-common (?)



On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 11:12:42AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Actually, I am glad that you mentioned policy, because I was going to
> quote a small part of it:
> 
> 
> 4.7 Programs for the X Windows system
                       ^^^^^^^^^

This terminology is incorrect.  man X.  Policy should be amended.

>    Some programs can be configured with or without support for X Windows.
                                                                 ^^^^^^^^^
Ditto.

>    Typically these binaries produced when configured for X will need the
>    X shared libraries to run.
> 
>    Such programs should be configured with X support, and should declare
>    a dependency on xlib6g (for the X11R6 libraries). Users who wish to
>    use the program can install just the relatively small xlib6g package,
>    and do not need to install the whole of X.

This policy in no way dictates what OTHER dependencies packages with X
support may or may not claim, and says absolutely nothing about what
dependencies xlib6g may or may not claim.

> This clearly suggests that xlib6g should be the *only* thing needed by a
> user who wants to use emacs or ghostscript without X.

It does nothing of the sort.

It says packages that can be configured with X support should do so, and
claim a dependency on xlib6g.

That is all.

> I do not decry the fact that xlib6g has to be installed at all, but if you
> make it to depend on yet something else, then you are breaking this
> policy.

I am not.  Once again your fantasies about what policy "really means" are
at odds with what it actually says.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson              |    Communism is just one step on the long
Debian GNU/Linux                 |    road from capitalism to capitalism.
branden@ecn.purdue.edu           |    -- Russian saying
cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgp8i2ypVTuGi.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: