Re: Makeing librsvg work (bizp2.dll missing)

[David NeÄas <yeti physics muni cz>]

On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 10:41:28AM -0600, Michael Torrie wrote:
> I think your points about keeping dependencies, such as zlib, up to date
> is well-taken, but the rest of your points seem to be about getting Tor
> to do your work for you.  I have produced several programs on win32
> (never did installer in these cases though; just zipped up the app
> folder with GTK inside it).  It's not that big of a deal.  I just built
> up my cross-development environment...

You built your cross-development environment and stuff -- proving that
you completely miss the point.

I maintain an application that
- while it isn't Hello World, it is considerably smaller than Gtk+[*]
- runs with any Gtk+ not older than three years or so
- releases new versions relatively often

Hence the desired Gtk+ installation scenario is that the MS users
install Gtk+ *once* *and* *never* *ever* *touch* *it*.  They might need
to upgrade after several years but in practice they will reinstall the
entire operating system a couple of times meanwhile.

The point is to get a selfcontained Gtk+ on the users' systems [before]
the first time they install such application.  *Some* Gtk+.  I don't
bloody care.

No amount of talking about how your vastly superior approach is better
[for you] will make these use cases disappear (and I suppose there are
many people in a situation similar to mine).  So please stop that you
are not constructive.

Distributing private versions of common shared libraries with every app
is a perversion.  And if bundling Gtk+ with every application is the
recommended solution then, of course, we want to link the applications
statically.  Concerning static linking... well, where should I start?

Yeti


[*] I'm looking forward to more capitalization jokes.  The QuickTime one
indeed lightened up my day.