Re: Why the lndir creation in Xorg/XFree86?

2005-12-18 Thread Richard A Downing
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 21:49:16 -0600 Bruce Dubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris Staub wrote: In the build instructions for Xorg and XFree86, it is recommended to compile the lndir program and use it to create a shadow directory of symbolic links where you will actually built the package.

Re: ESP Ghostscript

2005-12-18 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
Randy McMurchy wrote: 3. Though I'm not sure it is required any longer, it appears that the CFLAGS_SO variable in the current command is indirectly still used if you follow the package instructions to build the shared library. I'm not certain why the book's current command is the way it is

Re: Why the lndir creation in Xorg/XFree86?

2005-12-18 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Richard A Downing wrote: So, in fact, if we obey our own rules and say 'Always unpack a fresh copy of the source for each build': we don't need to do this. Possibly, but it also shows a unique way of building in the spirit of education. -- Bruce --

Recommended Dependencies [was: Re: r5444 ]

2005-12-18 Thread Randy McMurchy
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 12/18/05 10:24 CST: [CCing to BLFS-dev] I felt printing was a reasonable addition to gimp, so I recommended it. There is a note, in addition to the usual command explanations, explaining what to do if you don't want it. So, going forward, is it because of

Re: Recommended Dependencies [was: Re: r5444 ]

2005-12-18 Thread Andrew Benton
Randy McMurchy wrote: Now, it appears that we are recommending dependencies, and modifying the book accordingly, on opinions. It shouldn't be that way. Opinions are way too subjective, and what one guy thinks is important, is needless to another. Seems to me this is exactly the kind of thing

Re: Recommended Dependencies [was: Re: r5444 ]

2005-12-18 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Andrew Benton wrote: Seems to me this is exactly the kind of thing that should be a `Recommended' dependency. If someone has a printer and wants to use the Gimp to prepare them then it makes sense to install gimp-print. On the other hand if, they don't have a printer and will just be using

Re: Recommended Dependencies [was: Re: r5444 ]

2005-12-18 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Andrew Benton wrote: Randy McMurchy wrote: Now, it appears that we are recommending dependencies, and modifying the book accordingly, on opinions. It shouldn't be that way. Opinions are way too subjective, and what one guy thinks is important, is needless to another. Seems to me this

Re: Recommended Dependencies [was: Re: r5444 ]

2005-12-18 Thread Randy McMurchy
Lennon Cook wrote these words on 12/18/05 19:28 CST: Andrew Benton wrote: Seems to me this is exactly the kind of thing that should be a `Recommended' dependency. If someone has a printer and wants to use the Gimp to prepare them then it makes sense to install gimp-print. On the other hand

Re: Recommended Dependencies [was: Re: r5444 ]

2005-12-18 Thread Randy McMurchy
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 12/18/05 19:39 CST: Though technically absurd, apparently opinions are worth something. And the more I think about it, the more I think that Editors who wish to just arbitrarily deem a package as recommended should email the blfs-dev list and get an opinion

Re: Recommended Dependencies [was: Re: r5444 ]

2005-12-18 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Randy McMurchy wrote: Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 12/18/05 19:39 CST: Though technically absurd, apparently opinions are worth something. And the more I think about it, the more I think that Editors who wish to just arbitrarily deem a package as recommended should email the