Keith Matthews wrote:

On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:09:04 +0300
Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



I am the RH package manager for Wine.
My RPMS are indeed without BiDi support for now, as I was aiming for
them to be rebuildable on any fully-updated (and nothing more) RH
box. Of course, I can install the required libraries and build them
with BiDi support if you push me to it :)

Vincent





As all you have to do is have a local copy of the ICU library in order

to get BiDi support in (and configure will autodetect it), I don't
think having your RPMs compiled with BiDi support will hurt in any
way. Your SRPMS will still be compilable on any platform (except, of
course, that the compiled version will not have BiDi support. That,
however, is up to each individual person).




I think you should be considering multiple, alternative packages. Yes, I know it is more work, but even the current packages have dependencies on things that some people consider un-necessary and avoidable.

Far too many packagers seem to want to add everything including the
kitchen sink in, the end result is packages that are a right royal PITA
if you are trying to install on a small system.



That is precisely the reason BiDi requires no hard dependancies. If ICU is available during compilation, it will be available on the end system without any further packages required (statically linked into Wine). You will also find that most other packages are soft dependancies. I.e. - they are not required in order to make Wine work. If they are there, they will be used. If you don't want them, don't install them, and you still get Wine.

Shachar

--
Shachar Shemesh
Open Source integration consultant
Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/





Reply via email to