On Thursday, Sep 26, 2002, at 01:26 Europe/Brussels, Ben Hines wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 25, 2002, at 09:42 AM, jfm wrote: >> >> Finally, only 2 packages 'depend' on libxpm : swi-prolog and wmmail . >> Do they really need it ? Or would the lib from X11 be OK too ? >> Would it be possible to >> a) either delete libxpm altogether, or >> b) have those 2 packages offer an option like libxpm | x11 >> c) or have xfree86-base to provide libxpm ? And I meant in case b or c to have also a conflict between x11 and libxpm... > > mm, yes this could be a problem. Was this previously discussed? Not that I remember _ but I'm not following this list since long, nor systematically.. And the only relevant thing an archive search for 'libxpm' reveals is: http://www.mail-archive.com/fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/ msg02310.html which is less informative than my msg of yesterday. > Seems like we should get rid of the package. (a) was my first choice. But I was waiting whether the maintainers of the 2 depending packages and of libxpm wanted to argue differently, or whether they agreed... > > Anyway I just did an otool -L /sw/bin/* .. The only two that linked > against /sw/lib/libXpm were nedit and sunclock. Nothing in /sw/lib > linked against it. I had launched yesterday evening a rebuild of that long list with libxpm and libxpm-shlibs removed, so when I found your msg this morning, there remained only 18 packages that could possibly have problems. Among those 18, otool -L /sw/bin/* shows that oleo, sunclock, lyx, rxvt-ml, siag and xfce all linked against /sw/lib/libXpm : a non-negligible proportion. And I can't easily check in /sw/lib ("/usr/bin/otool: Argument list too long.")... JF Mertens ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
