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

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



On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 10:47:15AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> * /etc/X11/Xsession and /etc/X11/Xresources/.  The first one loads the
>   resources.  There's some code in xlib6g to use X resources.

Actually, these belong in xlib6g itself.  People with stand-alone X servers
will not be using them.

I am, however, going to wait until potato to make this particular change,
as it is only an aesthetic problem and I'd really like slink X to stop
being a moving target soon now.

> * A few _important_ docs.  If a program depends on xlib6g it's because it
>   will use X somehow.  If it uses X, I HOPE the user is willing to READ a
>   few docs.  If they don't read the docs, it's their problem, we can't do
>   anything about that.

Yes.  The point of that is to have some docs where people CANNOT miss them
because they're not installed.

> > * This dependency creates *indirect* dependencies on xfree86-common from
> > all the packages which depend on xlib6g.
> 
> You got it.  It creates a dependency of the X Windows System on that
> package.  The closest thing to an "X Windows System" package is xlib6g.
> 
> (The other solution is to merge xfree86-common back in xlib6g, where it
> lived for a long time, but why do that?  You have a very nice binary-all
> pacakge there)

I wish folks would read the extended description of xfree86-common.  It is
there specifically to contain things needed by X server-only configurations
as well as X "client servers" and standalone workstations.  Simply because
the package is not overflowing with such things now does not mean it might
not in the future.

Because Debian has not supported server-only X installations very well
in the past is no reason we should not attempt to do so now and in the
future.

Some people even decry the fact that xlib6g has to be installed at all,
with some justification.  If they never use any X clients, the X libs just
take up space.  But policy says (rightly, in my opinion) that we shouldn't
built two versions of packages that support X and non-X interfaces.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson              |       "To be is to do"   -- Plato
Debian GNU/Linux                 |       "To do is to be"   -- Aristotle
branden@ecn.purdue.edu           |       "Do be do be do"   -- Sinatra
cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpDDrDPfkrNN.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: