On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 12:21:45PM -0500, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> Jack Howarth wrote:
> > Ugh. The Xquartz developers have decided to
> > reverse Apple's original decision to remove libGLw
> > from X11 on Leopard and reintroduce it with their
> > 2.3.1 release. If anyone else agrees with me tha
On 29 Aug 2008, at 19:04, Daniel Macks wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 06:49:51PM +0200, Jean-Francois Mertens wrote:
>> Daniel Macks wrote:
>>> I don't think any fink-packaged programs are static-linked against
>>> fink libs (requires special flags, so it can't happen "by
>>> accident").
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 12:31:24PM -0500, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> Daniel Macks wrote:
> > Do we have any current feeling on whether package-sets that have
> > shared-libraries should also include the static libraries? Lots of
> > gnome does, lots of kde does not, other packages do or do not with no
Daniel Macks wrote:
> Do we have any current feeling on whether package-sets that have
> shared-libraries should also include the static libraries? Lots of
> gnome does, lots of kde does not, other packages do or do not with no
> pattern. I'm thinking about disabling them (or not explicitly enablin
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Daniel Macks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pro static:
>
> Required by users writing programs that need to be linked static. This
> might include trying to create something that can be drag'n'drop
> installed on others' machines without requiring full fink.
IMHO, t
Jack Howarth wrote:
> Ugh. The Xquartz developers have decided to
> reverse Apple's original decision to remove libGLw
> from X11 on Leopard and reintroduce it with their
> 2.3.1 release. If anyone else agrees with me that
> this is a bad idea (since Motif isn't shipped with
> X11 and the heade
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 06:49:51PM +0200, Jean-Francois Mertens wrote:
> Daniel Macks wrote:
> >>
> > I don't think any fink-packaged programs are static-linked against
> > fink libs (requires special flags, so it can't happen "by accident").
>
> E.g. scilab-atlas links against atlas's static lib
Daniel Macks wrote:
>>
> I don't think any fink-packaged programs are static-linked against
> fink libs (requires special flags, so it can't happen "by accident").
E.g. scilab-atlas links against atlas's static libs IIRC, and
I remember having seen a couple of other examples of static linking ..
Do we have any current feeling on whether package-sets that have
shared-libraries should also include the static libraries? Lots of
gnome does, lots of kde does not, other packages do or do not with no
pattern. I'm thinking about disabling them (or not explicitly enabling
them) in future gnome buil
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:16AM -0400, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
> On Aug 29, 2008, at 9:46 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
>>Ugh. The Xquartz developers have decided to
>> reverse Apple's original decision to remove libGLw
>> from X11 on Leopard and reintroduce it with their
>> 2.3.1 release. If
On Aug 29, 2008, at 9:46 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Ugh. The Xquartz developers have decided to
reverse Apple's original decision to remove libGLw
from X11 on Leopard and reintroduce it with their
2.3.1 release. If anyone else agrees with me that
this is a bad idea (since Motif isn't shipped wi
Ugh. The Xquartz developers have decided to
reverse Apple's original decision to remove libGLw
from X11 on Leopard and reintroduce it with their
2.3.1 release. If anyone else agrees with me that
this is a bad idea (since Motif isn't shipped with
X11 and the headers are not identical across the
12 matches
Mail list logo
