Re: Our (real) problems

I think the point is aimed more at library developers than application
developers. Certainely, if you are using the GNOME development platform
and a library is useful to you....use it. Maybe the real question is
"where does it make sense to merge libraries that are seperate for
arbitrary reasons".


On 31 Aug 2001 06:37:24 -0500, Bill Gribble wrote:
> On 30 Aug 2001 23:34:29 -0400, Alex Larsson wrote: 
> > One of the RedHat toolchain people and ELF guru (Jakub Jelinek) said
> > this:
> > > > > So how long will it take till an average GNOME or KDE program will need half
> > > > > the number of shared libraries than now?
> > > > 
> > > > /me points at gnucash and laughs again.
> > >
> > > Oh crap, 59. Shouldn't we start talking about efficiency to those folks? 
> The attributions are a little messed up so I'm not sure who said what 
> here, but please, start talking.  The gnucash people are listening. If
> you can tell me how to get all the functionality we want without
> requiring people to have that functionality installed I'll change the
> code right away. Answers that require me to rewrite significant amounts
> of code that are already finished and freely available aren't
> acceptable, sorry.
> All we did was adopt the Gnome environment and write a serious
> application which uses it.  The shared libs we require are the standard
> Gnome development environment plus Guppi.  If you can compile and run
> evolution, all you need to compile gnucash is guppi and a tiny
> Scheme program called g-wrap which generates Guile bindings for our
> C libs. 
> The main problem with gnucash right now is that either people don't
> understand how to use RPM or its defaults for "upgrade" vs. "install"
> are wrong... whenever the libtool interface number of a lib is bumped,
> they remove the old version when installing the new one (usually for
> evolution) and that breaks anything depending on the released version of
> the lib.  
> Part of this is related to the fact that people making RPMs for Gnome
> don't seem to care about keeping baseline versions of Gnome 1.4
> installed.  In my opinion, having Gnome 1.4 installed means that you
> keep the most recent release of ALL the library major versions that were
> released with the Gnome 1.4, and install new versions along side them
> rather than instead of them.  What's the point of a point release if
> people packaging software that uses Gnome can't depend on the software
> in the point release being installed? 
> Bill Gribble
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-2-0-list mailing list
> gnome-2-0-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]