Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-grimoire - Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery][Fwd: xfree86 as a special case]

sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Nick Jennings <nkj AT namodn.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 18:53:25 -0700

Ok, cool, we're in agreement :)


On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:38:39PM -0700, Andrew wrote:
> 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-Sorcery mailing list
> SM-Sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-sorcery
>




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page