Re: prc-tools
On 17 Jan 2001, Stephen Zander wrote:
> >>>>> "Siggi" == Siggi Langauf <langausd@fachschaft.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> writes:
> Siggi> On 17 Jan 2001, Stephen Zander wrote:
> >> (well, it is but the package is completely useless as then
> >> doesn't contain any target libraries).
>
> Siggi> Isn't it possible to build a package that requires the end
> Siggi> user to provide an original SDK at install time? This way,
> Siggi> you could ensure that the SDK is installed without having
> Siggi> to redistribute it.
>
> Reread the part of my email I left from your editing. :)
>
> How do you expect to create executables without a runtime environment?
> Building most of the prc-tools environment without the one piece that
> makes it usable to a developer is nothing but an invitation to
> continual flamage and building a source package a la qmail is both an
> ugly hack and results in a 37.5M package. Download that over your
> dial-up modem :/
I agree that the package would be useless without any runtime
environment. I also agree that a qmail-like package would be an ugly
hack. However, it would at least work. And that's IMHO much better than no
package at all.
Of course, it makes sense to ask for a redistributable SDK, but as long as
we don't have one, the "ugly hack" is the best we can get...
Just my $.02 ;-)
Siggi
Reply to: