Re: GNOME vs GNU gcc & glibc

[Gleef <dzol virtual-yellow com>]

On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Sergio Brandano wrote:
> 
>  Hi,
> 
> >>The core of GNOME is three tarballs:
> >>  gnome-libs
> >>  gnome-core
> >>  mc
> 
>  gnome-libs is not self-contained. My gnome-libs is built on top of a
>  number of other tarballs, including the followings:
> 
>  gmp-2.0.2
>  zlib-1.0.8
>  libpng-1.0.3
>  freetype-1.1
>  audiofile-0.1.6
>  esound-0.2.8
>  gsl-0.4.1
>  imlib-1.9.4
>  glib-1.2.1
>  gtk+-1.2.1
>  gtk-engines-0.5
>  fnlib-0.4
>  enlightenment-0.15.4
>  ORBit-0.4.2
>  GNU grep-2.3b
>  DocBook dsssl (db1.37)
>  gtk-doc-0.1
>  libaudiofile-0.1.5
> 
>  If you count them, they are 18.

None of them are part of GNOME.  Many of them aren't required by
gnome-libs.  Some of them (eg. enlightenment) aren't even REFERENCED by
gnome-libs.  Why didn't you include libm?  I'm sure you have that on your
system too, and it has more to do with GNOME than fnlib.


> >> Having them separate allows for easier upgrading.
> 
>  ... easier? I spent one worth week installing GNOME!!! 

Upgrading != installing.  Installing GNOME requires getting your libraries
up to spec (eg. libpng), and if it's your first time installing GNOME,
there's a learning curve required.  Most GNOME users in the future won't
even HAVE to install GNOME, their distribution will do it for them.

Upgrading has different issues.  When you upgrade, you generally are
looking to get the bug fixes and new features added that you want, while
touching as little else as possible.  Having a monolithic package doesn't
allow that.


> > Yes, I made my attempt to install GNOME in /sw/gnome, and I reported
> > the problems I encountered. The X11 comes clean into his very own
> > /usr/X11R6, so why not having something like /usr/GNOME ?
> 
> >If we used a default of /usr/GNOME, than you would have to edit your
> >system configuration just to run GNOME.  That's fine for people like
> >you and I who deliberately put GNOME out of the way, but not for
> >someone who is learning the system and doesn't even know how to change
> >the default.
> 
>  Does X11 requires it? No, it does not; in fact the distributions now
>  come ready with it.

X11 has been part of Unix for so long that the X11 directory tree is
included as part of the filesystem standards.  GNOME has no such position
to dictate location.


>  Would you like to have the next RedHat or Slackware with GNOME
>  installed in /usr/local?

No, they are Linux distributors.  Linux distributors should be installing
the distribution in /usr.  Distribution installed applications go in /usr,
manually installed applications go in /usr/local.  For more info, check
out:
  http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.0/fhs-toc.html


> >> The additional advantage for doing this is that, like Xfree98, one can
> >> download the official (and tested) binary, and use it withouth bothering
> >> too much about which compiler, which libs etc.
> 
> >I don't know about XFree98, but XFree86 supports many fewer platforms than
> >GNOME does.  Nobody has the equipment to produce binaries for every
> >platform GNOME supports.  Nor do we want to pick favorites, and only
> >release "official" binaries for a few favorite systems.  Therefore, we
> >release tarballs, any binary release is unofficial, and we rely on
> >volunteers to produce the binaries.
> 
>  Ok, point taken for the binaries.
>  Still the sources need to be self-contained.

What would you combine?

-Gleef