On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 20:46, Ruben Safir Secretary NYLXS wrote: > > > > /usr/lib, /usr/local/lib, $(PREFIX), $LDFLAGS, anything nonstandard in > > /etc/ld.so.conf on Linux... and that's just for libraries, not includes. > > The cure is worse than the disease. > > > > I disagree. The cure is the cure. And /etc/ld.so.conf is easy enough to > cat, is it not? > It still won't solve much. I can imagine the outcry from users taking their program and trying to run it on another machine, which doesn't look in /opt. Better to stick with standards and let the users and developers who know how to do it set their LD_LIBRARY_PATH (for example garnome). > > > And this statement is a a statement of acceptence of incompetency and negligence > which has plagued gnome for a LONG LONG time. The ability to upgrade the sources > through a constitant use of defaults for autoconf is ESSENTIAL to the long term > usage of any large software package in which the user is to become dependent on. I take extreme exception to this statement. Owen, Havoc, Sven and others are billiant and exceptional people and developers. They know their stuff. Owen and Havoc in particular have spent a lot of work on usability (in the UI and in the code) and have made GTK an incredible and powerful library. Although RedHat funds GTK development, this library is given to the community at no charge. You are free to build you own libraries and make them easier to compile. But I really doubt that things could be made much simpler. I'll grant you autoconf is limited and we do need a better build system, but within the rules that we've outlined here, GTK really is a matter of ./configure, make, make install, as long as you understand how to mix existing binary libraries with your new ones. The problem Tara is having seems to be that only the glib and gtk libraries are being compiled from source (so the e-mail says). Apparently atk and pango (how she (he?) compiled pango without some pain on rh6.2 is beyond me without having to get freetype and xft also) were installed in some binary form (rpm --nodeps, most likely). As a side note, I am attempting to build gtk2 on rh6.2 but I am already having problems getting pkg-config to build. There appears to be some limitations in the libtool that ships with rh62 that prevent it from compiling. I don't see how this situation could be easily resolved and "made easier;" GTK2 expects newer build tools that rh62 came with. > > > Ruben -- Michael Torrie <torriem@xxxxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
