On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:58:26 +0100 Leonard Ritter <contact@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 15:41 +0100, Thomas Kuther wrote: > > I understand that Aldrin w/o lunar, ladspa, dssi or anything is > > pretty pointless, right? > > actually, ladspa and dssi were not meant to be supported. i did the > wrappers only for fun, in fact i think it's a terrible idea to have > them at all. > > lunar is important, and llvm is a heavy dependency, i agree. perhaps i > can swap llvm for gcc, which everybody should have... > > if you are interested in the reason why llvm is included at all, i can > perhaps explain a little. > Yes, I (and maybe others) would be interested. I never heard of it before and am just starting to see what it is good for. Currently all i know about it is that it tends to cause massive headaches for packagers and others trying to compile it :)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
