Re: [libesmtp-devel] Away for a bit

[Charles Kerr <charles rebelbase com>]

> I figure there are three options
> 1) No .spec in the tarball and force RPM builders to make a choice
>    when they configure
> 2) .spec which builds OpenSSL dependent RPM
> 3) .spec which builds RPM without dependencies.
> 
> As I see it
> 
> 1) is least convenient but the result is always the expected one
> 2) is best but has dependencies
> 3) is most convenient but omits useful functionality

How many projects do releases without RPMs?  I have to admit
I'm surprised that there aren't RPMs on the libesmtp home page.
Most people just don't build from tarballs.  My preference would
be to have options 2 and 3 on the esmtp page:

   * source.tar.gz (100K, source code)
   * source.tar.bz2 (89K, source code)
   * RPM - basic (123K, minimum dependencies)
   * RPM - full (140K, ssl support, etc)
   * [Debs, etc.]


I do have a couple of questions about libesmtp from the past week.
They probably just show my ignorance, but what the heck:

1. If ssl is only used for md5, and we've already got md5 in
   libesmtp, then why are we looking for ssl and adding it as a
   dependency by default?

2. Do we need plugins, and if so, do we have to use libtool for
   them?  Would glib's dynamic module loading work?  Or could we bundle
   the libtool files we need?  I ask this for two reasons:

   * I can't install Balsa on my Mandrake box from RPMs because of
     libesmtp's "libltdl.so.0" dependency.  rpmfind can't find Mandrake
     packages for this, and Mandrake Cooker is still on Balsa 1.1.0.
     Requiring users to compile code is a terrible idea.

   * Both Pan and Balsa already require glib, which does module loading.
     developer.gnome.org/doc/API/glib/glib-dynamic-loading-of-modules.html
     has the scoop...