On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 01:17:07PM +0200, David Tardon wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 04:30:45PM +0200, Michael Stahl wrote: > > On 09.06.2015 16:20, Thorsten Behrens wrote: > > > Tor Lillqvist wrote: > > >> But neither is it very useful to have the already small set of OS X > > >> -based > > >> developers split into those who use a pure upstream way to build, those > > >> who > > >> use HomeBrew libjpeg but bundled Python, those who use MacPorts Python > > >> and > > >> libjpeg, etc. > > >> > > > Maybe. But is that really so different on Linux (where we seem to > > > cope)? And I guess Khaled's intention is to rather grow the pool of > > > Mac hackers, by removing one very early point of frustration ... > > > > we cope with this on Linux mainly because we have distribution package > > maintainers who actually work on having our build system pick up > > $random_distro_of_the_week's inconsistently packaged system libraries > > properly. > > ... and even so we fail to ensure that system headers/libs are not used > if one configures without them. E.g., as soon as one installs system > boost (or mdds, or glm, or...), it will be used no matter what value > SYSTEM_BOOST contains. Simply because -I/usr/include is in include path > before -I$W/UnpackedTarball/boost. But we do not seem to care overly > about this...
So why Mac OS X is treated differently, what is so special about it? Regards, Khaled _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice