sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items
List archive
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case]
- From: Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>
- To: sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org, sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case]
- Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 17:38:39 -0700
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:41:14PM -0700, Nick Jennings wrote:
> Your missing my point. xclock won't compile without X libs, neither
> will xmms... etc. etc. If it's not a "gnome" app or a "kde" app it's
> a "misc X app" and should it depend on XFree86?
yes, i mentioned that before:
> > > > ... but if no such dependancy exists, then you need to
> > > > list xfree86 as a dependancy. ...
as it turns out, xmms actually depends on gtk+ and glib, which should
depend on xfree86 but they dont. So there should be an inherited
dependancy there. Also xclock is actually part of xfree86, so it has no
relavent dependancies. On the other hand xdaliclock, does actually depend
on xfree86, and is not a gnome spell or kde spell, and i think this is the
example you were looking for, anyways, yes everything that doesnt depend
on something that somehow depends on xfree86 should have depends xfree86.
-
[SM-Grimoire][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Dufflebunk, 10/18/2002
-
[SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Nick Jennings, 10/19/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Dufflebunk, 10/19/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Julian v. Bock, 10/20/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Nick Jennings, 10/21/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Seth Woolley, 10/21/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Andrew, 10/21/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case], Nick Jennings, 10/21/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case], Andrew, 10/21/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case], Nick Jennings, 10/21/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case], Andrew, 10/21/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case], Nick Jennings, 10/21/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case], Robin, 10/22/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Andrew, 10/21/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Seth Woolley, 10/21/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Nick Jennings, 10/21/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case], Arwed von Merkatz, 10/22/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Julian v. Bock, 10/20/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Dufflebunk, 10/19/2002
-
[SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case],
Nick Jennings, 10/19/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.