On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Morrow, Joseph L <joseph.l.morrow at intel.com > wrote:
> Just adding a quick note.. > > Hi Pat, > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Lankswert, Patrick < > patrick.lankswert at intel.com> wrote: > > Ossama, > > > > I am not sure that your case justifies making glib a requirement for the > entire stack on multi-threaded systems. > > > > I wasn't trying to justify making glib a requirement, and was merely > answering your question about other uses of glib. Personally, I'd like to > see the glib dependency removed as well; although doing so will cause me > some grief with respect the code I'm currently working on. > > > > Correct me if I am wrong, but this will only for linux which will have > glib already installed. > > > > I think it'll be hard to find a Linux distribution where glib isn't > installed by default. :) > > > > Although ?glib-2.0? may already be installed with linux > distributions, we require the need to install the ?libglib-2.0-dev? package > which includes headers as well. > Sure, but why is that a problem? The headers would only be needed at build time, and wouldn't be deployed with the package. "libglib-2.0-dev" wouldn't be a run-time dependency. To be clear, I'm not arguing to retain glib for the long term. -Ossama -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20150414/b633f129/attachment.html>
