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

Re: Towards X11-based d-i: v2, progress report

On Thursday 25 February 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>  * udev: The previous patch set wasn't really good indeed. [...]
>    (I'm not sure we should name it udev-gtk-udeb since 
>    there's nothing gtk-related in there, it'd rather be X11-related,
>    but frankly, I don't care. :))

I chose -gtk as it will be used with the gtk frontend and is consistent 
with e.g. rootskel-gtk. But other names are certainly possible and the 
final name will need to be agreed with Marco.

>  * gtk+2.0: Julien's patch against its configure.in did the trick and
>    a few X libraries got dropped: libxcomposite1, libxdamage1,
>    libxfixes3, libxrandr2.

That's excellent!

>    That means fewer udebs to add (although libxfixes3 is still pulled by
>    libxcursor1), which is what we tried to achieve.

If that's the only thing that pulls it in, would it be an option to compile 
it statically?

Reply to: