sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs
- From: Hamish Greig <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs
- Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:59:42 +1100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:39, Hamish Greig wrote:
> this is *slightly* possible
> some *stuff* does link to x11 libs during the compile but a minimal install
> using xfree86-libs should be possible, you will then get a failure when it
> can't link to libXi (-lXi) so edit out that files reference to -lXi and
> retry. I am not sure how many occurances there are I think only one.
> I don't remember if that is with lesstif or the bundled motif either.
> try it and see
> Hamish
Just responding to myself,
I have spent some time working on xfree86-libs and xdirectfb. both now
install
*full* library sets.
My desktop (all of kde, half of gnome) which was rebuilt against xfree86 now
passes a cast --fix if I remove xfree86 and install either xfree86-libs or
xdirectfb. So j2sdk depends will get changed to X11-LIBS only (from
X11-SERVER)
an xfree86-libs install is only ~ 35MB
(if you rm -rf the doc/man dirs it is under 25 MB)
whereas a xfree86,xfree86-devel,xdirectfb install is ~100->150 MB
this should be exactly what you want ...
Hamish
ps I hope you hadn't spent too much time trying my other suggestion :(
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/xwBz8fSufZR6424RAu51AKCIx+Du0TC6UUHS9VoRPWyIV5OqZgCffwrN
jU/m2l8SqsvjeYH2r39mFgU=
=XKIQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
[SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/16/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
toxic, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Hamish Greig, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Casey Harkins, 11/17/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs, David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Casey Harkins, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Hamish Greig, 11/28/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/30/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs, Hamish Greig, 11/30/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/30/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Hamish Greig, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
toxic, 11/17/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.