On Tuesday, 24 January 2006, at 10:23:57 (+0900), Carsten Haitzler wrote: > believe it or not - redhat is like the #3 most used OS for "embedded" products > - yes.. redhat! fedora is #6 most popular - accor4ding to linuxdevices: > > http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT4036830962.html
Among linuxdevices READERS ONLY. That's hardly scientific. Even so, when was the last time you heard of RedHat or Fedora using anyone else's spec files? Don't you remember the Imlib2 fiasco? They created their own spec file WITHOUT all the separate module packages, and it caused problems with other packages (like Eterm) that required the loader packages. > so yes. i could imagine a TARGET system that doesnt include edje_cc > - BUt does inlude JUSt a runtime edje lib for display of gui data (i > would also split edje binary usilts off into another package - > edje-cc....rpm). a developer may want supprot - but the target user > devices may not. i can DEFINITELY see room for then even not needing > the buffer engine nor an x engine (as it may run in the framebuffer > directly) etc. etc. etc. I can imagine a lot of things too, but I asked for a Real World example. You have yet to give me one. Some project or product you KNOW is using evas and using RPM as a package manager. > and now the fiels will not just fail to build - but dump meaningful > errors to let you know you may need more modules. Yes, I saw that. That's a big step in the right direction. > no packages shouldnt know of the deps of a .edc - but then packages > dont know of the deps of a source .tar.gz either - do they? thats > "out of your hands". Most RPM's don't install tar.gz files either. One way or another, the packages will HAVE to know the deps of the .edc (or .edj) files. Otherwise stuff just won't work. > see above. Ditto. > evidence is borken anyway - regardless atm. Not true. It built just fine for me after David's patch was applied. > > enlightenment > > express > > ewl > > they fail to BUILD or run? They failed to BUILD. > you could have just added requires: to the evas package to require > the module packages too - so it sucks them in We've been through this before. Remember Imlib2? That sort of crap had to be undone there too. > using deps i do see as a reasonable stop-gap measure till things > settle. at least it doesnt throw out the ability to build separate > packages. Nothing has been thrown out. The module packages can be added back in easily once everything else is ready. But let me ask this: Once an .edc file has been turned into an .edj file, what modules are required at runtime to load the images in those files, if any? Is it enough to have those modules (esp. engine-buffer) at build time? Michael -- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Map out your future, but do it in pencil." -- Jon Bon Jovi ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
